Twenty-Fifth  Anniversary 

Eleventh  of  November 

Memorial  Meeting 


Souvenir  Edition  of  the  Famous  Speeches 
of  our  Martyrs,  delivered  in  court  when 
asked  if  they  had  anything  to  say  why 
sentence  of  death  should  not  be  passed 
upon  them,  October  7,  8  and  9,  1886. 


November  11,  18874912 


EIGHTH  EDITION  * 


This  Book  is  Beautifully  Hound  in  Clotb  and  Gilt.  $1.00 


LUCY   E.   PARSONS,  PUBLISHER 


1000  SOUTH  PAULINA  STREET 


CHICAGO,  ILL. 


>20 


Life  of 

Albert  R.  Parsons 


(Third  Edition) 


Containing  his  editorials,  correspondence 
and  speeches.  These  editorials,  etc.,  vivid- 
ly depict  his  hardships  and  struggles,  when 
he,  as  organizer  of  the  Knights  of  Labor, 
traveled  America  thirty  years  ago,  organiz- 
ing the  working  class.  They  are  valuable 
history.  His  last  night  on  earth;  his  im- 
pressions when  he  heard  the  building  of 
the  gallows,  upon  which  he  and  his  com- 
rades were  to  die  next  day,  are  dramatically 
told  in  his  letter  to  an  "Old  Comrade," 
written  November  11,  1887,  at  11.00  a.  m. 
Gov.  Aitgeld's  "Reasons."  Beautifully 
illustrated,  elegantly  bound,  310  octavo 
pages.  Price  $1.75. 


Lucy  E.  Parsons,  Publisher 

(His  Widow) 

'W 
1000  S.  Paulina  Street  Chicago,  Illinois 


Aclol|jh  Fisclx 


Louis  Lingg. 


Reading  from  left  to  right.     A.  Spies,  A.  Fischer,  G.  Engel,  A.  R.  Parsons. 
Louis  Lingg  had  died  the  day  before.     The  police  said  he  committed  suicide. 


This  poem  was  written  by  a  spectator  of  the  execution  of  our  com- 
rades. He  wrote  it  the  next  day  and  handed  it  to  Captain  Black,  who 
read  it  at  the  funeral,  Sunday  November  14,  1887.  Read  the  poem,  then 
look  at  the  gallows  scene  on  the  opposite  page.  And  in  looking  upon  the 
awful  murder  of  our  comrades,  swear  within  your  own  heart  never  to 
cease  your  work  until  this  accursed  system  of  capitalism  is  overthrown. 
Then  you  will  have  accomplished  that  for  which  they  died. 

Under  the  cruel   tree, 
Planted   by   tyranny, 
Grown   in  barbarity. 

Fostered  by  wrong; 
With   stately,   soldier  pace, 
With   simple,    manly   grace, 
Each  hero  took  his  place, 

Steady  and  strong. 

Wearing  their  robes  of  white, 
As  saints  or  martyrs  might, 
Calmly,  in  conscious  right, 

Faced  they   the  world. 
While  on  each  face  upturned 
Sternly  their  sad  eyes  burned 
Reproach,   for  blame  unearned 

Hatred  had  hurled. 

Hatred,  dull-eared  and  blind, 
Hatred,  of  unsound  mind, 
Hatred,  which  gropes  to  find 

That  which  is  worst! 
How  could  it  judge  a  heart, 
Where  wrong  and  suffering  start 
The  throbbing  valves  apart, 

E'en   still   they  burst? 

How  could  it  hear  the  call, 
Through  life's  grim,  silence  fall, 
Sounding  to  waken  all 

Those  souls  who  sleep? 
How  could  it  see  the  height? 
That  to  those  eyes  was  bright 
Where,  as  a  sun,  in  might, 

Freedom  shall  sweep? 

Not  for  the  hearts  that  bled, 
Not  for  the  bride  unwed, 
Children  and  wives  unfed, 

Should  our  tears  flow; 
But  for  the  palsied  brains, 
But  for  the  stagnant  veins, 
For  the  greed  that  sucks  its  gains 

From   human  woe. 

One  with  a  gentle  word, 
One  with  a  sob  unheard 
Of  warning  love;  a  third 

With  triumph  cry. 
Meeting  the  rope's  embrace — 
Of  gallows'  old  disgraced, 
Making  a  holy  place; 

Thus    did    they    die. 

And  when,  in  later  days, 
Bards  all  sing  lofty  lays, 
In  freedom's  makers'  praise, 

Their  names  shall  live; 
And  hearts  which  cannot  sing 
!?hall  the  pure  incense  swing 
Of  love,  that  all  may  bring, 

Tlifit  each  will  give. 


MONUMENT  ERECTED  ABOVE  THEIR  GRAVES  IN  WALDHEIM  CEMETERY 


Twenty-Fifth  Anniversary 

Eleventh  of  November 

Memorial  Meeting 


Souvenir  Edition  of  the  Famous  Speeches 
of  our  Martyrs,  delivered  in  court  when 
asked  if  they  had  anything  to  say  why 
sentence  of  death  should  not  be  passed 
upon  them,  October  7,  8  and  9,  1886. 


November  11,  1887-1912 


EIGHTH  EDITION' 


This  Book  is  Beautifully  Bound  in  Cloth  and  Gilt.  $1.00 


LUCY   E.   PARSONS,  PUBLISHER 

1000  SOUTH  PAULINA  STREET  CHICAGO,  ILL. 


Preface 


On  the  llth  day  of  November,  1912,  the  world  will  be  twenty-five 
years  older  than  it  was  when  the  People  of  the  State  of  Illinois,  through 
its  then  executive  machinery,  enforced  the  penalty  of  death  upon  the 
following  named  men,  who  were  of  the  number  of  defendants  condemned 
to  die  in  the  so-called  Anarchist  case,  the  judgment  of  death  being  pro- 
nounced December  3,  1886,  and  designating  hanging  as  the  method  of 
execution: 

August  Spies, 

Albert  R.  Parsons, 

Adolph   Fischer, 

George  Engel,  and 

Louis  Lingg. 

Oscar  W.  Neebe,  whose  conviction  of  guilt,  followed  by  a  verdict 
and  sentence  of  confinement  at  hard  labor  in  the  penitentiary  for  fifteen 
years,  was  remitted  by  Governor  Altgeld,  was  found  guilty  of  murder 
and  sentenced  as  above  stated  for  a  few  unguarded  words  spoken  in  a 
business  place  on  the  North  Side  on  the  evening  of  the  holding  of  the 
Haymarket  meeting.  These  unguarded  words  were  spoken  after  he  had 
read  a  small  handbill,  printed  in  German,  which  he  had  picked  up  from 
the  counter  before  him.  After  reading  it,  he  threw  it  back  upon  the 
counter,  with  words  like  these,  "Well,  maybe  it  will  go  the  other  way 
sometime!"  and  shortly  after  he  went  out. 

Louis  Lingg,  the  youngest  of  the  convicted  men,  met  his  death,  as 
near  as  could  be  ascertained,  in  this  manner: 

He  sat  in  his  cell  an  evening  or  two  before  the  day  appointed  for 
his  execution,  reading  by  the  light  of  a  candle.  An  explosion  was  heard, 
and  upon  opening  his  cell  door  it  was  seen  that  his  lower  jaw  had  been 
blown  from  his  head.  Whether  the  act  was  self-inflicted  or  the  work  of 
an  enemy  was  never  known.  He  never  spoke  a  word,  so  far  as  I  could 
learn,  after  his  wounding,  the  character  of  the  wound,  in  fact,  making 
articulate  speech  impossible. 

The  sentences  of  Michael  Schwab  and  Samuel  Fielden  were  com- 
muted and  they  were  subsequently  enlarged  by  executive  clemency. 

But  the  extreme  penalty  of  the  law  was  visited  in  full  measure  on 
August  Spies. 

Sentence  of  death  was  also  pronounced  on  Albert  R.  Parsons,  who 
voluntarily  returned  from  safe  harborage  among  loyal  friends  to  take  his 
place  at  the  bar  of  the  court,  refusing  to  sign  a  petition  for  pardon  or 
commutation  of  the  sentence,  basing  such  refusal  upon  the  brave  and  ad- 
mirable suggestion  by  him  that  in  view  of  the  then  state  of  public  opinion, 
while  he  was  assured  upon  reliable  authority  that  if  he  would  apply  for 
the  commutation  of  his  sentence  clemency  would  be  extended  to  him,  yet 
he  felt  assured  that  if  he  separated,  by  such  an  act,  his  fate  from  that  of 
his  fellows,  it  would  seal  their  doom  hopelessly  and  irrevocably! 

On  George  Engel  and  on  Adolph  Fischer,  also,  the  extreme  penalty 
of  death  was  visited. 

It  is  an  assertion  that  can  hardly  be  successfully  challenged  that  an 
enlightened  civilization  never  before  witnessed  such  a  sentence  and  its 
execution;  and  it  may  be  confidently  stated  that  NO  civilization,  pervaded 
by  Christian  ethics,  would  ever  have  tolerated  the  carrying  out  of  such 
a  judgment.  It  can  only  be  rationally  explained  upon  the  fact  that  the 
culmination  of  class  hatred,  inflamed  by  the  implacable  spirit  of  a  growing 
greed,  that  is  seeking  to  undermine  and  eradicate  the  gentler  and  more 
righteous  impulses  inculcated  in  the  teachings  of  the  Divine  Nazarene, 
rejected  the  impulses  of  enlightened  reason,  and  yielded  for  the  hour  to 
the  malignant  incentives  of  utter  and  unwise  selfishness  and  craven  fear. 


A  mighty  throng  of  people,  conservatively  estimated  at  twenty  thou- 
sand, followed  the  bodies  of  these  dead,  above  named,  to  their  last  earthly 
resting  places — people  whose  hearts  went  out  in  earnest  sympathy  to 
the  children  left  fatherless;  the  widows  bereft  of  husbands;  the  mothers 
robbed  of  children  beloved.  About  all  these  gathered  the  shadows  of 
quenchless  sorrow  and  enduringly  grievous  recollections.  Have  these 
twenty-five  years  brought  balm  to  their  sore  hearts?  Surely  not.  Sor- 
row may  be  poignant  but  endurable  where  there  is  in  the  sorrow  no  sense 
of  deep  and  unpardonable  wrong — but? 

The  ruthless  taking  of  human  life  under  the  forms  and  by  the  ma- 
chinery of  the  law  is  a  dagger  thrust  into  the  heart  of  justice  and  the 
law  and  a  wrong  to  the  people  that  is  inexcusable — an  act  of  unjustifiable 
violence,  with  no  possibility  of  righteous  extenuation. 

This  is  neither  place  nor  occasion  for  anything  in  the  way  of  biog- 
raphy of  these  victims  of  undiscriminating  prejudice,  fear  and  resentment. 

Within  the  pages  of  this  book,  in  other  and  appropriate  places,  will 
be  found  the  words  that  tell  the  life  stories  of  these  men.  These  are  but 
the  forewords  of  introduction  to  the  stories  of  these  men,  and  else- 
where within  the  pages  of  this  volume  will  be  found,  from  many  who 
esteemed  them  aright,  words  of  deep  and  loyal  appreciation,  and  words 
of  the  victims  themselves  that  will,  with  the  cooling  of  the  years  and  the 
abatement  of  the  feelings  of  fear  and  resentment  of  those  old  passions 
of  a  quarter  of  a  century  ago,  help  to  a  gentler  and  more  considerate 
judgment  than  was,  seemingly,  possible  in  the  blind  riot  of  the  passions 
of  the  hour. 

That  something  having  at  least  the  semblance  of  justice  may  now 
be  done  to  these  men,  who  with  high  and  undaunted  courage  mounted 
the  steps  of  the  scaffold  with  words  of  high  and  beautiful  submission  to 
the  judgment  to  which  they  bowed,  I  have  written  these  words. 

Chicago,  October  19,  1912.  W.  P.  BLACK. 


"The  Eleventh  of  November,  1887" 

By  LUCY  E.  PARSONS 

The  Eleventh  of  November  has  become  a  day  of  international  import- 
ance, cherished  in  the  hearts  of  all  true  lovers  of  liberty  as  a  day  of  martyr- 
dom. On  this  day  was  offered  upon  the  cruel  gallows-tree,  martyrs  as  true 
to  their  high  ideals  as  were  ever  -sacrificed  in  any  age. 

The  writer  will  assume  that  the  present  generation  is  but  superficially 
informed  regarding  the  details  that  led  up  to  the  eleventh  of  November, 
for  in  this  busy  age,  twenty-five  years  are  a  long  time  to  remember  the 
details  of  any  event,  however  important. 

In  1886  the  working  class  of  America,  for  the  first  time,  struck  for  the 
reduction  of  the  hours  of  daily  toil  to  eight  per  day.  It  was  a  great  strike. 
Chicago  was  the  storm-center  of  that  strike,  because  of  the  activities  of  the 
martyrs  of  the  eleventh  of  November,  1887. 

The  working  class  practically  tied  up  the  city  of  Chicago,  Illinois,  for  three 
days.  On  the  afternoon  of  the  third,  of  that  year,  the  police  shot  several 
strikers  and  clubbed  many  more  brutally.  The  next  evening,  May  the  fourth, 
the  now  historic  Haymarket  meeting  was  held.  The  Haymarket  meeting  is 
referred  to  historically  as  the  "Haymarket  Riot."  This  Haymarket  meeting 
was  absolutely  peaceable  and  quiet.  The  mayor  of  Chicago  attended  the 
meeting,  and,  subsequently,  took  the  stand  as  the  first  witness  for  the  defense 
at  the  Anarchist  Trial,  so-called.  Following  is  the  mayor's  testimony  in  part: 

"I  went  to  the  meeting  for  the  purpose  of  dispersing  it,  in  case  I  should 
feel  it  necessary  for  the  safety  of  the  city.  .  .  .  There  was  no  suggestion 
made  by  either  of  the  speakers  looking  toward  calling  for  immediate  use  of 
force  or  violence  towards  any  person  that  night;  if  there  had  been,  I  should 
have  dispersed  them  at  once.  I  went  to  the  police  station  during  Parsons' 
speech  and  I  stated  to  Captain  Bonfield  that  I  thought  the  speeches  were 
about  over ;  that  nothing  had  occurred  or  looked  likely  to  occur  to  require 
interference,  and  that  he  had  better  issue  orders  to  his  reserves  at  the  sta- 
tions to  go  home.  Bonfield  replied  that  he  had  reached  the  same  conclusion, 
from  reports  brought  to  him.  .  .  .  During  my  attendance  I  saw  no 
weapons  at  all  upon  any  person.  ...  In  listening  to  the  speeches,  I  con- 
cluded that  it  was  not  an  organization  to  destroy  property.  After  listening 
a  little  longer,  I  went  home."  This  extract  is  here  given  from  the  mayor's 
testimony,  because  this  meeting  is  referred  to  very  often,  even  by  radicals, 
as  the  "Haymarket  Riot."  Had  the  inspector  of  police  obeyed  the  mayor's 
orders  and  not  rushed  a  company  of  police  upon  that  peaceful  meeting, 
there  would  have  been  no  trouble.  Instead,  as  soon  as  the  mayor  left,  the 
inspector  rushed  a  company  of  bluecoats  to  the  meeting;  they  began  club- 
bing the  men  and  women  and  scattered  them  in  every  direction.  Upon  this 
onrush  of  the  police,  some  one  threw  a  bomb.  Who  threw  that  bomb,  no  one 
to  this  day  knows,  except  he  who  threw  it. 

He  has  never  been  identified,  never  been  arrested,  consequently  could 
never  have  been  tried,  but  my  husband  and  his  comrades  were  put  to  death 
on  November  llth  as  co-conspirators  with  the  bomb-thrower,  but  he  is  un- 
known ! 

Our  comrades  were  not  murdered  by  the  state  because  they  had  any 
connection  with  the  bomb-throwing,  but  because  they  had  been  active  in 
organizing  the  wage-slaves  of  America  thirty  years  ago. 


The  capitalistic  class  didn't  want  to  find  the  bomb-thrower ;  they  foolishly 
believed  that  by  putting  to  death  the  active  spirits  of  the  labor  movement  of 
that  time  they  could  frighten  the  working  class  back  into  slavery. 

The  so-called  trial  was  the  greatest  travesty  upon  justice  of  modern 
times.  The  bailiff  who  was  selecting  the  jury,  a  creature  named  Ryce, 
boasted  thus :  "I  am  managing  this  case  and  I  know  what  I  am  about. 
Those  fellows  (our  comrades)  are  going  to  hang  as  certain  as  death.  I  am 
calling  such  men  as  the  defendants  will  have  to  challenge  peremptorily  and 
waste  'their  time  and  challenges.  Then  they  will  have  to  take  such  jurymen 
as  the  prosecution  wants." 

The  jury  that  did  try  the  case  was  out  less  than  three  hours.  They  left 
the  court  room  after  four  o'clock  on  August  23  and  before  seven  o'clock  the 
self-same  afternoon  had  reached  the  astounding  verdict,  sending  seven  men 
to  the  gallows  and  the  eighth  man  to  the  penitentiary  for  the  term  of  fifteen 
years.  The  trial  had  lasted  some  sixty-three  days.  Think  of  the  mass  of 
testimony  that  the  jury  would  have  had  to  go  over  in  order  to  give  them 
even  the  semblance  of  a  fair  trial !  Then  think  of  the  audacity  of  a  jury 
being  out  less  than  three  hours,  and  of  the  brutality  of  a  community  putting 
men  to  death  under  such  a  verdict  and  never  allowing  them  a  new  trial ! 

Albert  R.  Parsons,  my  husband,  never  was  arrested.  On  May  5,  the 
day  after  the  Haymarket  meeting,  when  he  saw  the  men  with  whom  he  had 
been  organizing  labor  for  the  past  ten  years  of  his  life,  being  arrested  and 
thrown  into  prison  and  treated  generally  as  criminals,  he  left  Chicago.  On 
June  21,  the  day  the  trial  began,  he  walked  into  the  court  room,  unrecognized 
by  the  police  and  detectives,  and  surrendered  himself,  he  having  been  in- 
dicted during  his  absence  and  a  reward  of  $5,000  having  been  offered  for  his 
arrest.  He  asked  the  court  to  grant  him  a  fair  trial  that  he  might  prove  his 
absolute  innocence.  He  was  never  granted  the  shadow  of  a  fair  and  im- 
partial trial  and  was  put  to  death  with  the  rest  of  his  comrades  on  November 
11,  1887! 

The  men  were  asked  if  they  had  anything  to  say  as  to  why  sentence  of 
death  should  not  be  passed  upon  them.  They  arose  in  the  court  room  on 
the  days  of  October  7,  8  and  9,  1886,  and  delivered  their  now  so  "Famous 
Speeches,"  giving  their  reasons  why  the  sentence  of  death  should  be  suspended 
and  they  be  given  a  new  trial.  They  called  the  judge's  attention  to  the 
fact  that  the  leading  capitalistic  paper  in  Chicago  had  opened  up  its  columns 
to  receive  subscriptions  to  a  fund  of  $100,000.00,  to  be  paid  the  jury  as  a 
present  for  the  verdict  it  had  rendered  against  them.  But  they  were  never 
granted  a  new  trial.  They  were,  instead,  railroaded  to  the  gallows  at  the 
command  of  the  money  power ! 

For  the  past  two  years  I  have  devoted  myself  to  selling  their  speeches. 
The  Seventh  Edition,  of  14,000,  will  be  out  in  a  few  weeks'  time*  (see  foot- 
note No.  2)  being  now  in  press.  These  copies  of  the  Speeches  have  been 
practically  all  sold  amongst  the  members  of  the  conservative  organized  labor 
unions. 

Verily,  their  "SILENCE  IS  MORE  POWERFUL  THAN  THE 
VOICES  THAT  WERE  STRANGLED"  that  dark  November  day ! 

There  could  be  no  other  results  in  a  matter  that  had  already  been  fixed 
in  advance,  except  such  as  came  on  October  10,  when  the  infamous  Judge 
"Jeffries"  gave  out  his  reasons  for  denying  a  new  trial,  and  afterwards 
sentenced  them  to  death.  No  more  remarkable  scene  than  that  could  well 
be  imagined.  The  hot,  stifling  court  room,  crammed  to  its  utmost  capacity 
by  an  eager  crowd,  quite  in  sympathy  with  the  capitalistic  ideas  and  break- 


*  (Footnote  'Xo.    2).     The  Jewish   comrades  now  have  a  movement  started 
to  have  these  speeches  translated  and  published  in  the  Yiddish  language. 


ing  at  times  into  clapping,  which  was  illy  and  hypocritically  repressed  by  the 
only  too  gratified  court — the  little,  ugly,  hard-visaged  judge,  with  a  nut- 
cracker bald  head  and  cunning  eyes.  One  could  fancy  his  tender  mercies — 
if  ever  they  existed — as  dried  up  and  long  since  fallen  to  dust.  Then  the 
coarse,  brutal  state's  attorney,  with  the  ferocious  howl  of  an  infuriated, 
blood-hungry  wild  beast,  who  continually  bellowed  for  the  lives  of  these  men 
before  him.  And  the  little  cunning,  red-headed  lawyer  who  made  the  most 
telling  speech  that  the  State  gave  out,  a  cruel,  crafty  effort  that  misrepre- 
sented everything,  absolutely,  and  did  it  so  foxily  that  each  point  drew 
blood  like  the  slash  of  a  claw. 

Forever  will  live  in  the  minds'  eyes  of  those  who  had  the  sad  privilege 
of  seeing  this  strange  and  terrible  scene,  the  calm  and  noble  countenances 
of  the  accused,  who  showed  no  feeling  except  when  an  occasional  flicker  of 
fine  scorn  passed  over  their  refined  countenances,  as  they- sat  and  heard  their 
every  act,  deed,  thought,  meaning,  however  innocent,  misrepresented, 
twisted  and  their  lives  going  to  certain  destruction  at  the  hands  of  their 
enemies'  tools  and  minions.  All  the  way  through  and  especially  noticeable 
the  last  day,  detectives  and  police,  plain-clothes  men,  and  others  of  that  ilk, 
filled  the  court  room.  When  the  sentence  of  death  was  being  pronounced, 
these  fellows  stood  up  and  pointed  their  revolvers  right  into  the  faces  of  our 
comrades,  evidently  fearing — scroundrels  are  ever  cowards— -an  attempt  at 
rescue  on  the  part  of  friends,  on  this,  the  last  appearance  of  the  prisoners 
outside  of  the  jail.  But  no  such  attempt  was  made  and  sentence  was  passed, 
the  date  of  the  execution  being  set  for  December  3.  One  instant  to  give  a 
passing  hand-shake  to  sorrowing  relatives  and  indignant  friends  and  they 
were  marched  back  again  to  their  dungeons. 

Then  began  the  long,  tedious  period  that  lasted  for  over  a  year,  our 
comrades  languishing  in  their  living  tombs.  The  attorneys  for  the  defense 
began  occupying  themselves  with  their  preparations  for  taking  the  case  to 
the  Illinois  Supreme  Court  and  accordingly  an  appeal  was  made  to  a 
judge  of  that  body,  on  November  25,  who  granted  a  supersedeas  and  admitted 
that  error  had  been  made.  Many  friends  believed  that  this  meant  that  our 
comrades  would  evidently  walk  out  free  men,  but  those  who  had  seen  the 
working  of  the  trial  knew  better.  They  knew  that  the  supersedeas  as  well 
as  every  other  step  of  the  proceedings,  was  carefully  taken  with  a  view  to 
giving  the  world  an  idea  of  the  "impartiality"  of  the  absolutely  hellish  con- 
spiracy, the  animus  of  which  was  to  do  away  with  certain  labor  leaders 
whose  intelligence,  honesty  and  fearlessness  had  made  them  objects  of  the 
fear  and  hate  of  the  capitalistic  "Robber-Baron"  element.  This  supersedeas, 
therefore,  merely  gave  a  breathing  spell  for  the  lawyers  to  get  ready  their 
briefs  for  a  hearing  of  the  plea  for  a  new  trial,  before  the  Illinois  Supreme 
Court.  The  friends  and  many  persons  indignant  at  the  monstrousness  of  pro- 
ceedings that  they  had  only  supposed  under  the  reign  of  the  "Little  Father" 
of  all  the  Russians,  were  firmly  determined  to  try  every  court  available,  in 
order  to  prove  and  make  the  point  that  the  courts  were  not  impartial  but, 
instead,  the  ready  tools  of  the  moneyed  power.  Our  comrades  themselves 
always  believed  this,  that  no  justice  would  ever  be  done  them  by  any  court, 
and,  indeed,  that  the  whole  affair  was  to  be  regarded  in  the  light  of  a  howling 
farce,  were  not  murder,  of  the  most  revolting  and  cold-blooded  sort,  the 
evident  intention. 

This  appeal  went  to  the  Illinois  Supreme  Court  on  March  18,  had  the 
same  hypocritical  examination,  the  honorable  judges  deciding  that  no  errors 
had  been  made  of  any  gravity, — when,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  they  were  there 
thick — and  the  decision  of  the  lower  court  was  sustained,  the  day  of  execu- 
tion being  again  set,  this  time  for  November  11,  1887. 

So  month  after  month  dragged  along  for  our  comrades,  suffering  acute- 
ly for  want  of  exercise  and  fresh  air — when  this  old  jail  was  subsequently 


torn  down  to  make  way  for  the  new  one,  a  black  lake  of  putrid  filth  was 
found,  fully  explaining  why  our  comrades  had  their  teeth  decay  and  fall  out — 
and  in  the  frantic  efforts  of  friends,  sympathizers  and  enlightened  persons 
generally,  to  show  the  mass  of  the  people  what  was  being  done,  all  in  the 
name  of  law  and  order.  The  relatives,  friends,  the  Defence  Committee  and 
many  persons  of  recognized  positions,  writers,  lecturers,  poets,  held  meet- 
ings, distributed  circulars,  brochures  and  wrote  articles  for  the  radical  press 
— the  capitalistic  press  was  solidly  closed  against  one  word  of  the  truth — 
and  the  public  would  have  finally  seen  at  least  something  of  what  was  being 
done,  had  not  the  police,  ever  vigilant  in  their  hate,  counteracted  it  all  by 
"finding"  bombs  at  regular  intervals,  under  side-walks,  in  alleys,  etc.  Made 
by  the  police  themselves,  placed  there  in  the  night,  these  bombs  were  solemn- 
ly "found"  in  the  morning  and  served  as  the  subject  of  blazing  editorials 
and  solemn,  life-sized  pictures  in  the  leading  capitalistic  papers.  The  public, 
which  does  not  go  below  the  surface,  believed  what  it  was  told.  The  old, 
wicked  Judge  "Jeffries,"  the  state's  attorney,  and  other  tools  of  the  money- 
power,  all  whined  about  threats  on  their  lives  and  so  on,  and  so  the  public 
was  kept  at  that  excited  and  ugly  temper  that  was  wanted  of  them — as  when, 
two  thousand  years  ago  they  shouted  "Let  loose  to  us  Barabbas" — for  the 
hirelings  of  the  high  and  mighty  scroundrels  who  were  putting  through 
this  judicial  murder  fully  meant  to  so  befuddle  the  public  on  the  facts  as  to 
get  its  backing  and  consent. 

So  the  time  wore  away  through  the  hot  summer  to  autum,  when  the 
attorneys  for  the  defence  took  the  case  to  the  U.  S.  Supreme  Court.  These 
scoundrelly  big-wigs,  in  solemn  conclave,  decided  that  no  Constitutional 
Right  had  been  violated,  although  two  of  the  main  points  in  the  Constitution 
had  been  grossly  trodden  under  foot,  namely,  the  right  of  free  speech  and 
free  assembly,  at  the  Haymarket  meeting  and  the  right  to  free  and  impartial 
trial  at  the  hands  of  the  law,  which  was  absolutely  wanting.  It  is  a  matter 
of  conjecture  as  to  how  many  millions  of  capitalistic  gold  went  to  animate 
that  decision ! 

So  we  are  brought  down  to  the  last  days  when  the  friends  and  sympa- 
thizers circulated  petitions  for  executive  clemency  by  the  thousands  and  the 
police,  no  less  active,  "found"  bombs  and  even  one  of  the  Supreme  Court 
judges  got  an  infernal  machine  (which  turned  out  to  be  a  box  of  papers 
about  some  other  case!).  The  only  serene  people  were  our  condemned  com- 
rades. Finally,  the  last  hours,  an  appeal  was  to  be  made  to  the  governor  for 
executive  clemency.  This  meant  a  sort  of  pilgrimage  to  the  City  of  Spring- 
field and  hundreds  of  persons,  including  scores  of  friends  and  some  of  the 
relatives.  Thousands  of  others  wrote  letters,  our  comrades  themselves, 
except  in  the  caes  of  Fielden  and  Schwab,  positively  refusing  to  admit 
that  they  had  committed  any  misdemeanor  or  to  ask  for  any  mercy.  They 
protested  that  they  w'ished  merely  justice.  The  city  was,  at  this  point,  in  a 
perfect  state  of  martial  law.  Several  regiments  were  camped,  with  cannon, 
close  to  the  city  hall  and  sleuths,  armed  police  and  such  wretches  were  every- 
where. One  wondered  why  the  plutocrats  were  so  afraid  of  their  bad  con- 
sciences which,  doubtless,  raised  avenging  hands  from  every  shadow ! 

Our  comrades,  in  the  meantime,  were  subjected  to  every  outrage  and 
humiliation.  Their  clothing  and  even  their  persons  were  continually  searched, 
the  daily  papers  were  denied  them,  they  were  no  longer  allowed  the  freedom 
of  the  corridors  for  a  moment's  exercise,  relatives  and  friends  no  longer 
admitted  to  see  them.  They  were  even  forced  to  the  horrid  task  of  willing 
their  bodies,  each  separately  to  their  families,  to  keep  them  from  being 
desecrated  by  the  police,  after  death. 

The  weather  had  turned  very  cold  and  those  of  the  members  of  the 
families  who  had  not  gone  to  Springfield  to  see  the  governor,  gathered  in 


a  pitiful  group  in  the  corridor  of  the  jail  vestibule,  which  was  really  then 
the  court  house,  and,  beginning  in  the  early  morning,  begged  for  a  last  word 
of  farewell  with  their  loved  ones.  This  was  flatly  denied.  All  the  livelong, 
terrible  day  these  people,  mostly  women,  had  to  stand  on  their  feet  in  the 
bitter  cold  and  witness  the  preparations  for  the  execution — they  had  seen 
the  coffins  carried  in  the  evening  before ! — without  either  food  or  water,  hour 
after  hour,  with  a  brutal  crowd  of  police  and  their  friends  crowding  about 
to  the  extent  of  hundreds,  staring  and  commenting.  At  midnight,  a  very 
few  of  the  relatives  were  taken  in,  one  at  a  time,  by  a  turnkey,  with  a 
lantern  in  his  left  and  a  revolver  in  the  other.  The  inside  of  the  jail 
buzzed  like  a  hive,  so  full  was  it  with  reporters,  police,  sleuths,  and  other 
tools  of  the  moneyed  class. 

After  a  few  seconds  of  agonized  parting,  each  poor  woman  was  marched 
back  and  left  in  the  dark  corridor.  After  midnight  the  "decision"  of  the 
governor  was  not  announced  in  order  to  keep  down  any  attempt  at 
rescue  by  friends  and  sympathizers.  The  governor  simply  refused  inter- 
ference, except  in  the  cases  of  Schwab  and  Fielden,  who  received  life- 
sentences  in  the  penitentiary — (afterwards  these  were  pardoned  by  Governor 
Altgeld). 

The  morning  of  the  eleventh  found  our  dear  comrades  composed,  smiling, 
firm  without  bravado.  I,  who  had  been  denied  admission  on  Thursday 
evening  went  again  in  the  morning,  accompanied  by  a  woman  friend  and 
comrade  and  our  two  children,  to  say  a  last  farewell  to  my  beloved  husband 
and  that  the  children  might  have  their  father's  blessing  and  last  remembrance. 
A  cordon  of  police  armed  with  Winchesters  surrounded  the  jail.  Pressing 
against  this  was  a  crowd  of  thousands  of  persons.  To  one  policeman  after 
another  I  appealed  without  effect,  until  one  told  us  to  come  around  the 
corner  and  he  would  "let  us  in,"  which  he  proceeded  to  do  by  hustling  us  into 
a  partrol  wagon  and  taking  us  to  the  station  house,  where  we  were  stripped 
naked,  searched  and  locked  up  all  day,  until  three  in  the  afternoon,  that  is, 
three  hours  after  the  execution.  The  city  was  in  the  hands  of  the  people 
and  drunken  police.  The  rich  to  a  man  had  gone  away  for  a  few  days' 
vacation,  terrorized  by  their  own  black  consciences. 

The  execution  itself  was  put  through  as  swiftly  as  possible.  Our  comrades 
were  not  to  be  permitted  the  usual  speech,  always  accorded  to  doomed  men. 
They  had,  however,  foreseen  this  and  each  had  prepared  a  sentence  to 
express  his  last  feelings.  This  they  said  just  as  the  caps  were  being  adjusted 
that  forever  shut  the  light  from  their  eyes.  Their  clear  voices  rang  out  in 
those  sentences  now  become  classics.  Let  us  pass  over  the  agonizing  scenes 
at  the  homes  of  the  men,  when  wives,  children,  mothers,  sisters,  brothers, 
friends,  received  back  the  bodies  of  their  dear  ones,  from  whom  life  had 
been  crushed  out  and  all  only  because  they  had  dared  to  tell  the  workers  the 
simple  truth ! 

On  Sunday  morning,  November  14,  the  funeral  took  place,  and  no  more 
remarkable  sight  will  ever  be  witnessed  than  that  procession  of  countless 
thousands  that  filed  past  the  dead  as  they  lay  in  their  homes,  and  then  the 
procession  of  five  black  hearses  that  passed  through  the  city,  accompanied 
by  bands  playing  dirges  and  carriages  bearing  the  friends  and  sympathizers, 
the  mourners  directly  behind  the  hearses.  Past  the  offices  of  the  newspapers 
that  Parsons  and  Spies  had  edited  to  the  North  Western  train  in  waiting,  past 
the  cortege  which  bore  them  to  Waldheim  Cemeterry.  The  streets  along 
which  this  remarkable  procession  wended  its  way  were  solidly  packed  with 
human  faces  and  as  the  hearses  past,  hats  were  taken  off  by  thousands, 
instinctively,  as  it  were.  They  did  not  know  it,  but  they  somehow  felt  that 
they  were  in  the  presence  of  great  dead  who  had  died  nobly ! 

At  the  cemetery  a  way  had  to  be  cleared  through  the  dense  throng  for  the 
procession.  Four  addresses  were  made  in  English  and  German,  the  most 


notable  being  the  oration  pronounced  by  Captain  Black,  leading  attorney  for 
the  defence.  And  so,  beneath  mountains  of  floral  offerings,  before  sorrow- 
ing relatives  and  friends,  all  that  was  left  of  our  beloved  comrades  was  con- 
signed to  their  last  resting  place,  on  the  banks  of  the  Desplaines  River. 

But  only  their  ashes  for  their  noble,  true  souls,  animated  by  an  undying 
faith  in  and  love  of  humanity,  will  never  die  and  their  last  words  will  con- 
tinue to  echo  in  the  hearts  of  people,  down  through  the  ages  of  men,  who 
still  believe  in  right  and  the  brotherhood  of  man.  That  the  present  genera- 
tion thinks  this,  may  be  gathered  by  the  fact  that  on  every  Decoration  Day,  or 
day  set  apart  for  the  decoration  of  the  graves  of  soldiers  that  died  in  our 
wars,  thousands  pass  around  the  Anarchist  Monument  in  silent  homage  or 
grave  thoughtfulness,  as  if  weighing  the  question  of  these  men  "who  were 
not  as  other  men". 

REPORT  FROM  CAPITALIST  PAPER. 

"When  the  march  was  begun  to  the  gallows,  all  the  men  showed  re- 
markable courage,  without  the  slightest  hint  of  bravado. 

"Parsons  was  wonderfully  composed. 

"The  moment  his  feet  touched  the  scaffold,  Parsons  seemed  to  completely 
lose  his  identity  and  to  feel  that  his  spirit  was  no  longer  a  part  of  his  body. 
He  stood  like  one  transfigured.  Only  he — the  one  American — seemed  to 
realize  to  the  full  extent  that  he  must  die  in  a  manner  to  impress,  if  pos- 
sible, on  all  future  generations  the  thought  that  he  was  a  martyr.  No 
tragedian  that  has  paced  a  stage  in  America  ever  made  a  more  marvelous 
presentation  of  a  self-chosen  part,  perfect  in  every  detail. 

"The  upward  turn  of  his  eyes,  his  distant,  far-away  look,  and,  above  all, 
the  attitude  of  apparent  complete  resignation  that  every  fold  of  the  awkward 
shroud  only  served  to  make  more  distinct,  was  by  far  the  most  striking 
feature  of  the  entire  gallows  picture.  When  the  halter  was  placed  about  his 
neck  he  never  faltered.  He  stood  erect,  looking  earnestly  yet  reproachfully 
at  the  people  before  him.  The  nooses  were  quickly  adjusted,  the  caps  pulled 
down,  and  a  hasty  movement  made  for  the  straps.  Then  from  beneath 
the  hoods  came  these  words : 

"Spies : — 'There  will  come  a  time  when  our  silence  will  be  more  power- 
ful than  the  voices  you  are  strangling  today !' 

"Engel : — 'Hurrah  for  Anarchy  !' 

"Fischer : — 'This  is  the  happiest  moment  of  my  life !' 

"Parsons : — 'Will  I  be  allowed  to  speak,  Oh  men  of  America,  let  me 
speak,  Sheriff  Matson  !•  Let  the  voice  of  the  people  be  heard  !  Oh — .'  But  the 
signal  had  been  given,  and  the  foul  murder  was  over." 


These  speeches  of  our  five  comrades  who  were  murdered  on  November  11, 
1887,  are  taken  from  the  "Famous  Speeches  of  the  Eight  Chicago  Anarchists," 
for  this  special  souvenir  edition,  so  don't  pay  any  attention  to  page  numbering. 

The  Famous  Speeches  of  the  Eight  Chicago  Anarchists  has  reached  its 
7th  Edition  of  14,000  in  two  years. 

LUCY  E.  PARSONS,  Publisher. 


cADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

FREEDOM 

Toil  and  pray!     The  world  cries  cold; 
Speed  thy  prayer,  for  time  is   gold. 
At  thy  door  Need's  subtle  tread; 
Pray  in  haste!  for  time  is  bread. 

And  thou  plough'st  and  thou  hew'st, 
And  thou  rivet'st  and  sewest, 
And    thou   harvestest   in   vain; 
Speak!  O,  man;  what  is  thy  gain? 

Fly'st  the  shuttle  day  and  night, 
Heav'st  the  ores  of  earth  to  light, 
Fill'st  with  treasures  plenty's  horn; 
Brim'st  it  o'er  with  wine  and  corn. 

But  who  hath  thy  meal  prepared, 
Festive  garments   with  thee  shared; 
And   where   is   thy   cheerful   hearth, 
Thy  good  shield  in  battle  dearth? 

Thy  creations   round  thee  see 

All  thy  work,   but  naught  for  thee! 

Yea,  of  all  the  chains  alone  thy  hand  forged. 

These  are  thine  own: 

Chains  that  round  the  body  cling, 
Chains   that  lame  the  spirit's   wing, 
Chains  that  infants'   feet,  indeed, 
Clog!     O,  workman!     Lo!     Thy  meed. 

What  you  rear  and  bring  to  light, 
Profits  by  the  idle  wight, 
What  ye  weave  of  divers  hue, 
'Tis  a  curse — your  only  due. 

What  ye  build,  no  room  insures, 
Nor  a  sheltering  roof  to  yours, 
And  by  haughty  ones  are  trod — 
Ye,  whose  toil  their  feet  hath  shod. 

Human  bees!     Has  nature's  thrift 
Given  thee  naught  but  honey's  gift? 
See!  the  drones  are  on  the  wing. 
Have  you  lost  the  will  to  sting? 

Man  of  labor,  up,  arise! 
Know  the  might  that  in  thee  lies, 
Wheel  and  shaft  are  set  at  rest 
At  thy  powerful  arm's  behest. 

Thine  oppressor's  hand  recoils 
When  thou,  weary  of  thy  toil, 
Shun'st  thy  plough  thy  task  begun, 
When  thou  speak'st:  Enough  is  done! 

Break  this  two-fold  yoke  in  twain; 
Break  thy  want's  enslaving  chain; 
Break  thy  slavery's  want  and  dread; 
Bread  is  freedom,  freedom  bread. 


66  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

That  poem  epitomizes  the  aspirations,  the  hope,  the  need,  of  the  work- 
ing classes,  not  alone  of  America,  but  of  the  civilized  world. 

Your  honor:  if  there  is  one  distinguishing  characteristic  which  has  made 
itself  prominent  in  the  conduct  of  this  trial,  it  has  been  the  passion,  the  heat, 
and  the  anger,  the  violence  both  to  sentiment  and  to  person,  of  everything 
connected  with  this  case.  You  ask  me  why  sentence  of  death  should  not  be 
pronounced  upon  me,  or,  what  is  tantamount  to  the  same  thing,  you  ask  me 
why  you  should  give  me  a  new  trial  in  order  that  I  might  establish  my  inno- 
cence and  the  ends  of  justice  be  subserved.  I  answer  you  and  say  that  this 
verdict  is  the  verdict  of  passion,  born  in  passion,  nurtured  in  passion,  and  is 
the  sum  total  of  the  organized  passion  of  the  city  of  Chicago.  For  this  rea- 
son I  ask  your  suspension  of  the  sentence  and  the  granting  of  a  new  trial. 
This  is  one  among  the  many  reasons  which  I  hope  to  present  before  I  con- 
clude. Now,  what  is  passion?  Passion  is  the  suspension  of  reason;  in  a  mob 
upon  the  streets,  in  the  broils  of  the  saloon,  in  the  quarrels  on  the  sidewalk, 
where  men  throw  aside  their  reason  and  resort  to  feelings  of  exasperation, 
we  have  passion.  There  is  a  suspension  of  the  elements  of  judgment,  of 
calmness,  of  discrimination  requisite  to  arrive  at  the  truth  and  the  establish- 
ment of  justice.  1  hold  that  you  cannot  dispute  the  charge  which  I  make, 
that  this  trial  has  been  submerged,  immersed  in  passion  from  its  inception 
to  its  close,  and  even  to  this  hour,  standing  here  upon  the  scaffold  as  I  do, 
with  the  hangman  awaiting  me  with  his  halter,  there  are  those  who  claim  to 
represent  public  sentiment  in  this  city,  and  I  now  speak  of  the  capitalistic 
press — that  vile  and  infamous  organ  of  monopoly  of  hired  liars,  the  people's 
oppressor— even  to  this  day  these  papers  are  clamoring  for  our  blood  in  the 
heat  and  violence  of  passion.  Who  can  deny  this?  Certainly  not  this  court. 
The  court  is  fully  aware  of  the  facts. 

In  order  that  I  may  place  myself  properly  before  you,  it  is  necessary,  in 
vindication  of  whatever  I  may  have  said  or  done  in  the  history  of  my  past 
life,  that  I  should  enter  somewhat  into  details,  and  I  claim,  even  at  the  ex- 
pense of  being  lengthy,  the  ends  of  justice  require  that  this  shall  be  done. 

For  the  past  twenty  years  my  life  has  been  closely  identified  with,  and  I 
have  actively  participated  in,  what  is  known  as  the  labor  movement  in 
America.  I  have  some  knowledge  of  that  movement  in  consequence  of  this 
experience  and  of  the  careful  study  which  opportunity  has  afforded  me  from 
time  to  time  to  give  to  the  matter,  and  what  I  have  to  say  upon  this  subject 
relating  to  the  labor  movement  or  to  myself  as  connected  with  it  in  this 
trial  and  before  this  bar — I  will  speak  the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  be  the  con- 
sequences what  they  may. 

The  United  States  census  for  1880  reports  that  there  are  in  the  United 
States  16,200,000  wage  workers.  These  are  the  persons  who,  by  their  indus- 
try, create  all  the  wealth  of  this  country.  And  now  before  I  say  anything 
further  it  may  be  neccessary  in  order  to  clearly  understand  what  I  am  going 
to  state  further  on,  for  me  to  define  what  I  mean  and  what  is  meant  in  the 
labor  movement  by  these  words,  wage  worker.  Wage  workers  are  those  who 
work  for  wages  and  who  have  no  other  means  of  subsistence  than  the  sell- 
ing of  their  daily  toil  from  hour  to  hour,  day  to  day,  week  to  week,  month 
to  month,  and  year  to  year,  as  the  case  may  be.  Their  whole  property  con- 
sists entirely  of  their  labor — strength  and  skill  or,  rather,  they  possess  noth- 
ing but  their  empty  hands.  They  live  only  when  afforded  an  opportunity  to 
work,  and  this  opportunity  must  be  procured  from  the  possessors  of  the 
means  of  subsistence — capital — before  their  right  to  live  at  all  or  the  oppor- 
tunity to  do  so  is  possessed.  Now,  there  are  16,200,000  of  these  people  in  the 
United  States,  according  to  the  census  of  1880.  Among  this  number  are 
9,000,000  men,  and  reckoning  five  persons  to  each  family,  they  represent  45,- 
000.000  of  our  population.  It  is  claimed  that  there  are  between  eleven  and 
twelve  million  voters  in  the  United  States.  Now,  out  of  these  12.000,OOG 
voters,  9,000.000  are  wage  workers.  The  remainder  of  the  16,200,000  is  com- 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  67 

posed  of  the  women  and  children  employed  in  the  factories,  the  mines  and  the 
various  avocations  of  this  country.  This  class  of  people — the  working  class 
— who  alone  do  all  the  useful  and  productive  labor  of  this  country  are  the 
hirelings  and  dependents  of  the  propertied  class. 

Your  honor,  I  have,  as  a  workingman,  espoused  what  I  conceive  to  be 
the  just  claims  of  the  working  class;  I  have  defended  their  right  to  liberty 
and  insisted  upon  their  right  to  control  their  own  labor  and  the  fruits  there- 
of, and  in  the  statement  that  I  am  to  make  here  before  this  court  upon  the 
question  why  I  should  not  be  sentenced,  or  why  I  should  be  permitted  to 
have  a  new  trial,  you  will  also  be  made  to  understand  why  there  is  a  class 
of  men  in  this  country  who  come  to  your  honor  and  appeal  to  you  not  to 
grant  us  a  new  trial.  1  believe,  sir,  that  the  representatives  of  that  mil- 
lionaire organization  of  Chicago,  known  as  the  Chicago  Citizens'  Association 
stand  to  a  man  demanding  of  your  honor  our  immediate  extinction  and  sup- 
pression by  an  ignominious  death.  Now,  I  stand  here  as  one  of  the  people, 
a  common  man,  a  workingman,  one  of  the  masses,  and  I  ask  your  honor  to 
give  ear  to  what  I  have  to  say  You  stand  as  a  bulwark ;  you  are  as  a  brake 
between  them  and  us.  You  are  here  as  the  representative  of  justice,  hold- 
ing the  poised  scales  in  your  hands.  You  are  expected  to  look  neither  to 
the  right  nor  the  left,  but  to  that  by  which  justice,  and  justice  alone,  shall  be 
subserved.  The  conviction  of  a  man,  your  honor,  does  not  necessarily  prove 
that  he  is  guilty.  Your  law  books  are  filled  with  instances  where  men  have 
been  carried  to  the  scaffold  and  after  their  death  it  has  been  proven  that 
their  execution  was  a  judicial  murder.  Now,  what  end  can  be  subserved  in 
hurrying  this  matter  through  in  the  manner  in  which  it  has  been  done? 
Where  are  the  ends  of  justice  subserved,  and  where  is  truth  found  in  hur- 
rying seven  human  beings  at  the  rate  of  express  speed  to  the  scaffold  and  an 
ignominious  death?  Why,  if  your  honor  please,  the  very  method  of  our  ex- 
termination, the  deep  damnation  of  our  taking  off,  appeals  to  your  honor's 
sense  of  justice,  of  rectitude,  and  of  honor.  A  judge  may  also  be  an  unjust 
man.  Such  things  have  been  known.  We  have,  in  our  histories,  heard  of 
Lord  Jeffreys.  It  need  not  follow  that  because  a  man  is  a  judge  he  is  also 
just.  As  everyone  knows,  it  has  long  since  become  the  practice  in  American 
politics  for  the  candidates  for  judgeships,  throughout  the  United  States,  to 
be  named  by  corporations  and  monopoly  influences,  and  it  is  a  well  known 
secret  that  more  than  one  of  our  chief  justices  have  been  appointed  to  their 
seats  upon  the  bench  of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  at  the  instance 
of  the  leading  railway  magnates  of  America — the  Huntingtons  and  Jay 
Goulds.  Therefore  the  people  are  beginning  to  lose  confidence  in  some  of 
our  courts  of  law. 

Now,  I  have  not  been  able  to  gather  together  and  put  in  a  consecutive 
shape  these  thoughts  which  I  wish  to  present  here  for  your  consideration. 
They  have  been  put  together  hurriedly  in  the  last  few  days,  since  we  began 
to  come  in  here,  first,  because  I  did  not  know  what  you  would  do,  nor  what 
the  position  of  your  honor  would  be  in  the  case,  and  secondly,  because  I  did 
not  know  upon  what  ground  the  conclusion  of  the  prosecution  would  be 
made  denying  us  the  right  of  a  rehearing;  and,  therefore,  if  the  method 
of  the  presentation  of  this  matter  be  somewhat  disconnected  and  disjointed, 
it  may  be  ascribed  to  that  fact,  over  which  I  had  no  control. 

I  maintain  that  our  execution,  as  the  matter  stands  just  now,  would  be 
a  judicial  murder,  rank  and  foul,  and  judicial  murder  is  far  more  infamous 
than  lynch  law — far  worse.  Bear  in  mind,  please,  this  trial  was  conducted 
by  a  mob,  prosecuted  by  a  mob,  by  the  shrieks  and  howls  of  a  mob,  an  or- 
ganized, powerful  mob.  But  that  trial  is  novr  over.  You  sit  here  judicially, 
calmly,  quietly,  and  it  is  now  for  you  to  look  at  this  thing  from  the  stand- 
point of  reason  and  common  sense.  There  is  one  peculiarity  about  the  case 
that  I  want  to  call  your  attention  to.  It  was  the  manner  and  the  method  of 
its  prosecution  !  On  the  one  side,  the  attorneys  for  the  prosecution  con- 


68  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

ducted  this  case  from  the  standpoint  of  capitalists  as  against  the  laborers. 
On  the  other  side,  the  attorneys  for  the  defense  conducted  this  case  as  a 
defense  against  murder,  not  for  laborers  and  not  against  capitalists.  The 
prosecution  in  this  case  throughout  has  been  a  capitalistic  prosecution,  in- 
spired by  the  instinct  of  capitalism,  and  I  mean  by  that,  by  class  feelings,  by 
a  dictatorial  right  to  rule,  and  a  denial  to  common  people  of  the  right  to  say 
anything  or  have  anything  to  say  to  these  men,  by  that  class  of  persons  who 
think  that  working  people  have  but  one  right  and  one  duty  to  perform,  viz., 
obedience.  They  conducted  this  trial  from  that  standpoint  throughout,  and, 
as  was  very  truthfully  stated  by  my  Comrade  Fielden,  we  were  'prosecuted 
ostensibly  for  murder,  until,  near  the  end  of  the  trial,  when  all  at  once  the 
jury  is  commanded,  yea,  commanded  to  render  a  verdict  against  us  as  An- 
archists. Your  honor,  you  are  aware  of  this ;  you  know  this  to  be  the  truth ; 
you  sat  and  heard  it  all.  I  will  not  make  a  statement  but  what  will  be  in 
accord  with  the  facts,  and  what  I  do  say  is  said  for  the  purpose  of  refresh- 
ing your  memory  and  asking  you  to  look  at  both  sides  of  this  matter  and 
view  it  from  the  standpoint  of  reason  and  common  sense. 

Now,  the  money  makers,  the  business  men,  those  people  who  deal  in 
stocks  and  bonds,  the  speculators  and  employers,  all  that  class  of  men  known 
as  the  money  making  class,  have  no  conception  of  this  labor  question ;  they 
don't  understand  what  it  means.  To  use  the  street  parlance,  with  many  of 
them  it  is  a  difficult  matter  to  "catch  onto"  it,  and  they  are  perverse  also ; 
they  will  not  have  knowledge  of  it.  They  don't  want  to  know  anything  about 
it,  and  they  won't  hear  anything  about  it,  and  they  propose  to  club,  lock 
up,  and,  if  necessary,  strangle  those  who  insist  on  their  hearing  this  ques- 
tion. Can  it  any  longer  be  denied  that  there  is  such  a  thing  as  the  labor 
question? 

I  am  an  Anarchist.  Now  strike !  But  hear  me  before  you  strike.  What 
is  Socialism,  or  Anarchism?  Briefly  stated,  it  is  the  right  of  the  toiler  to 
the  free  and  equal  use  of  the  tools  of  production,  and  the  right  of  the  pro- 
ducers to  their  product.  That  is  Socialism.  The  history  of  mankind  is  one 
of  growth.  It  has  been  evolutionary  and  revolutionary.  The  dividing  line 
between  evolution  and  revolution,  or  that  imperceptible  boundary  line  where 
one  begins  and  the  other  ends  can  never  be  designated.  Who  believed  at 
the  time  that  our  fathers  tossed  the  tea  into  Boston  harbor  that  it  meant 
the  first  act  of  the  revolution  separating  this  continent  from  the  dominion 
of  George  III.  and  founding  this  republic  here  in  which  we,  their  descend- 
ants, live  today.  Evolution  and  revolution  are  synonymous.  Evolution  is 
the  incubatory  state  of  revolution.  The  birth  is  the  revolution — its  process 
the  evolution. 

What  is  the  history  of  man  with  regard  to  the  laboring  classes?  Origin- 
ally the  earth  and  its  contents  were  held  in  common  by  all  men.  Then  came 
a  change  brought  about  by  violence,  robbery  and  wholesale  murder,  called 
war.  Later,  but  still  way  back  in  history,  we  find  that  there  were  but  two 
classes  in  the  world — slaves  and  masters.  Time  rolled  on  and  we  find  a  la- 
bor system  of  serfdom.  This  serf  labor  system  existed  in  the  sixteenth  and 
seventeenth  centuries,  and  throughout  the  world  the  serf  had  a  right  to  the 
soil  on  which  he  lived.  The  lord  of  the  land  could  not  exclude  him  from  its 
use.  But  the  discovery  of  America  and  the  developments  which  followed 
that  discovery  and  its  settlement,  a  century  or  two  afterwards,  the  gold 
found  in  Peru  and  Mexico  by  the  invading  hosts  of  Pizarro  and  Cortez,  who 
carried  back  to  Europe  this  precious  metal,  infused  new  vitality  into  the 
commercial  stagnant  blood  of  Europe  and  set  in  motion  those  wheels  which 
have  rolled  on  and  on,  until  today  commerce  covers  the  face  of  the  earth ; 
time  is  annihilated  and  distance  is  known  no  more.  Following  the  aboli- 
tion of  the  serfdom  system  was  the  establishment  of  the  wage  labor  system. 
This  found  its  fruition,  or  birth,  rather,  in  the  French  Revolutions  of  1789 
and  1793.  It  was  then  for  the  first  time  that  civil  and  political  liberty  was 


ADDRESS  Or  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  69 

established  in  Europe.  We  see,  by  a  mere  glance  back  into  history,  that  the 
sixteenth  century  was  engaged  in  a  struggle  for  religious  freedom  and  the 
right  of  conscience — mental  liberty.  Following  that  in  the  seventeenth  and 
eighteenth  centuries  was  the  struggle  throughout  France  which  resulted  in 
the  establishment  of  the  republic  and  the  founding  of  the  right  of  political 
liberty.  The  struggle  today,  which  follows  on  in  the  line  of  progress  and 
in  the  logic  of  events,  is  the  industrial  problem,  of  which  we  were  the  repre- 
sentatives, as  the  State's  attorney  has  said  we  were,  selected  by  the  grand 
jury  because  we  were  leaders,  and  are  to  be  punished  and  consigned  to  an 
ignominious  death  for  that  reason,  that  the  wage  slaves  of  Chicago  and  of 
America  may  be  horrified,  terror-stricken,  and  driven  like  rats  back  to  their 
holes,  to  hunger,  slavery,  misery  and  death.  The  industrial  question,  fol- 
lowing on  in  the  natural  order  of  events,  the  wage  system  of  industry  is  now 
up  for  consideration;  it  presses  for  a  hearing;  it  demands  a  solution;  it 
cannot  be  throttled  by  this  district  attorney,  nor  all  the  district  attorneys  up- 
on the  soil  of  America. 

Now,  what  is  this  labor  question  which  these  gentlemen  treat  with  such 
profound  contempt,  for  advocating  which  these  distinguished  "honorable" 
gentlemen  would  throttle  and  put  us  to  an  ignominious  death  and  hurry  us 
like  rats  into  our  holes?  What  is  it?  You  will  pardon  me  if  I  exhibit  some 
feeling.  I  have  sat  here  for  two  months,  and  these  men  have  poured  their 
vituperations  out  upon  my  head  and  I  have  not  been  permitted  to  utter  a 
single  word  in  my  own  defense.  For  two  months  they  have  poured  their 
poison  upon  me  and  upon  my  colleagues.  For  two  months  they  have  sat 
here  and  spat  like  adders  the  vile  poison  of  their  tongues,  and  if  men  could 
have  been  placed  in  a  mental  inquisition  and  tortured  to  death,  these  men 
would  have  succeeded  here  now,  for  we  have  been  vilified,  misrepresented, 
held  in  loathsome  contempt,  without  a  chance  to  speak  or  contradict  a  word. 
Therefore,  if  I  show  emotion,  it  is  because  of  this,  and  if  my  comrades  and 
colleagues  with  me  here  have  spoken  in  such  strains  as  these,  it  is  because  of 
this.  Pardon  us.  Look  at  it  from  the  right  standpoint.  What  is  this  la- 
bor question?  It  is  not  a  question  of  emotion;  the  labor  question  is  not  a 
question  of  sentiment;  it  is  not  a  religious  matter;  it  is  not  a  political 
problem ;  no,  sir,  it  is  a  stern  economic  fact,  a  stubborn  and  immovable  fact. 
It  has,  it  is  true,  its  emotional  phase;  it  has  its  sentimental,  religious,  po- 
litical aspects ;  but  the  sum  total  of  this  question  is  the  bread  and  butter 
question,  the  how  and  why  we  shall  live  and  earn  our  daily  bread.  This  is 
the  labor  movement.  It  has  a  scientific  basis.  It  is  founded  upon  fact,  and 
I  have  been  to  considerable  pains  in  my  researches  of  well  known  and  dis- 
tinguished authors  on  this  question  to  collect  and  present  to  you  briefly  what 
this  question  is  and  what  it  springs  from.  I  will  first  explain  to  you  briefly 
what  capital  is : 

Capital  is  the  stored  up  and  accumulated  surplus  of  past  labor;  capital  is 
the  product  of  labor.  The  function  of  capital  is  to  appropriate  or  confiscate 
for  its  own  use  and  benefit  the  "surplus"  labor  product  of  the  wage  laborer. 
The  capitalistic  system  originated  in  the  forcible  seizure  of  natural  opportu- 
nities and  rights  by  a  few,  and  then  converting  those  things  into  special 
privileges  which  have  since  become  vested  rights,  formally  entrenched  be- 
hind the  bulwarks  of  statute  law  and  government.  Capital  could  not  exist 
unless  there  also  existed  a  majority  class  who  were  propertyless,  that  is, 
without  capital,  a  class  whose  only  mode  of  existence  is  the  selling  of  their 
labor  to  capitalists.  Capitalism  is  maintained,  fostered,  and  perpetuated  by 
law ;  in  fact,  capital  is  law — statute  law — and  law  is  capital.  Now,  briefly 
stated,  for  I  will  not  take  your  time  but  for  a  moment,  what  is  labor?  La- 
bor is  a  commodity  and  wages  is  the  price  paid  for  it.  The  owner  of  this 
commodity  sells  it,  that  is,  himself,  to  the  owner  of  capital  in  order  to  live. 
Labor  is  the  expression  of  energy,  the  power  of  the  laborer's  life.  This 
energy  or  power  he  must  sell  to  another  person  in  order  to  live.  It  is  his 


70  ADDRESS  OF  .ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

only  means  of  existence.  He  works  to  live,  but  his  work  is  not  simply  a 
part  of  his  life;  it  is  the  sacrifice  of  it.  His  labor  is  a  commodity  which  un- 
der the  guise  of  free  labor  he  is  forced  by  necessity  to  hand  over  to  another 
party.  The  whole  of  the  wage  laborer's  activity  is  not  the  product  of  his 
labor — far  from  it.  The  silk  he  weaves,  the  palace  he  builds,  the  ores  he 
digs  from  out  the  mines,  are  not  for  him.  The  only  thing  he  produces  for 
himself  is  his  wages,  and  the  silk,  the  ores,  and  the  palace  which  he  built, 
are  simply  transformed  for  him  into  a  certain  kind  of  means  of  existence, 
namely,  a  cotton  shirt,  a  few  pennies,  and  the  mere  tenancy  of  a  lodging 
house.  In  other  words,  his  wages  represent  the  bare  necessities  of  his  ex- 
istence, and  the  unpaid-for  or  "surplus"  portion  of  his  labor  product  con- 
stitutes the  vast  superabundant  wealth  of  the  non-producing  or  capitalist 
class. 

That  is  the  capitalist  system  defined  in  a  few  words.  It  is  this  system 
that  creates  these  classes,  and  it  is  these  classes  that  produce  this  conflict. 
This  conflict  intensifies  as  the  power  of  the  privileged  classes  over  the  non- 
possessing  or  propertyless  classes  increases  and  intensifies,  and  this  power 
increases  as  the  idle  few  become  richer  and  the  producing  many  become 
poorer;  and  this  produces  what  is  called  the  labor  movement.  This  is  the 
labor  question.  Wealth  is  power;  poverty  is  weakness. 

If  I  had  time  I  might  stop  here  to  answer  some  suggestions  that  prob- 
ably arise  in  the  minds  of  some  persons,  or  perhaps  of  your  honor,  not  being 
familiar  with  this  question.  I  imagine  I  hear  your  honor  say,  "Why,  labor 
is  free.  This  is  a  free  country."  Now,  we  had  in  the  southern  states  for 
nearly  a  century  a  form  of  labor  known  as  chattel  slave  labor.  That  has 
been  abolished,  and  I  hear  you  say  that  labor  is  free;  that  the  war  has  re- 
sulted in  establishing  free  labor  all  over  America.  Is  this  true?  Look  at 
it.  The  chattel  slave  of  the  past — the  wage  slave  of  today;  what  is  the 
difference?  The  master  selected  under  chattel  slavery  his  own  slaves.  Un- 
der the  wage  slavery  system  the  wage  slave  selects  his  master,  and  he  has 
got  to  find  one  or  else  he  is  carried  down  here  to  my  friend,  the  jailer,  and 
occupies  a  cell  along  side  of  myself.  He  is  compelled  to  find  one.  So  the 
change  of  the  industrial  system,  in  the  language  of  Jefferson  Davis,  ex- 
president  of  the  Southern  Confederacy,  in  an  interview  with  the  New  York 
Herald  upon  the  question  of  the  chattel  slave  system  of  the  South  and  that 
of  the  so-called  "free  laborer,"  and  their  wages — Jefferson  Davis  stated  posi- 
tively that  the  change  was  a  decided  benefit  to  the  former  chattel  slave 
owners  who  would  not  exchange  the  new  system  of  wage  labor  at  all  for 
chattel  labor,  because  now  the  dead  had  to  bury  themselves  and  the  sick 
take  care  of  themselves,  and  now  they  don't  have  to  employ  overseers  to 
look  after  :hem.  They  give  them  a  task  to  do — a  certain  amount  to  do. 
They  say:  "Now,  here,  perform  this  piece  of  work  in  a  certain  length  of 
time,"  and  if  you  don't  (under  the  wage  system,  says  Mr.  Davis),  why, 
when  you  come  around  for  your  pay  next  Saturday,  you  simply  find  in  the 
envelope  which  contains  your  money,  a  note  which  informs  you  of  the  fact 
that  you  have  been  discharged.  Now,  Jefferson  Davis  admitted  in  his  state- 
ment that  the  leather  thong  dipped  in  salt  brine,  for  the  chattel  slave,  had 
been  exchanged  under  the  wage  system  for  the  lash  of  hunger,  an  empty 
stomach  and  the  ragged  back  of  the  wage  slave  of  free  born  American 
sovereign  citizens,  who,  according  to  the  census  of  the  United  States  for 
1880,  constitute  more  than  nine-tenths  of  our  entire  population. 

But  you  say  the  wage  slave  had  advantages  over  the  chattel  slave.  The 
chattel  slave  couldn't  get  away  from  it.  Well,  if  we  had  the  statistics,  I 
believe  it  could  be  shown  that  as  many  chattel  slaves  escaped  from  bondage 
with  the  bloodhounds  of  their  masters  after  them  as  they  tracked  their  way 
over  the  snow-beaten  rocks  of  Canada,  and  via  the  underground  grape  vine 
road — I  believe  the  statistics  would  show  that  as  many  chattel  slaves  escaped 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  71 

from  their  bondage  under  that  system  as  can  and  do  escape  today  from  wage 
bondage  into  capitalistic  liberty. 

I  am  a  Socialist,  I  am  one  of  those,  although  myself  a  wage  slave,  who, 
holds  that  it  is  wrong,  wrong  to  myself,  wrong  to  my  neighbor,  and  unjust 
to  my  fellowmen  for  me,  wage  slave  that  I  am,  to  undertake  to  make  my 
escape  from  wage  slavery  by  becoming  a  master  and  an  owner  of  slaves  my- 
self. I  refuse  to  do  it;  I  refuse  equally  to  be  a  slave  or  the  owner  of  slaves. 
Had  I  chosen  another  path  in  life,  I  might  be  upon  the  avenue  of  the  city 
of  Chicago  today,  surrounded  in  my  beautiful  home  with  luxury  and  ease, 
with  slaves  to  do  my  bidding.  But  I  chose  the  other  road,  and  instead  I 
stand  here  today  upon  the  scaffold.  This  is  my  crime.  Before  high  heaven 
this  and  this  alone  is  my  crime.  I  have  been  false  and  a  traitor  to  the  in- 
famies that  exist  today  in  capitalistic  society.  If  this  is  a  crime  in  your 
opinion  1  plead  guilty  to  it. 

Now,  be  patient  with  me;  I  have  been  with  you,  or  rather,  I  have  been 
patient  with  this  trial.  Follow  me,  if  you  please,  and  look  at  the  oppressions 
of  this  capitalistic  system  of  industry.  As  was  depicted  by  my  comrade 
Fielden,  this  morning,  every  new  machine  that  comes  into  existence  comes 
as  a  competitor  with  the  man  of  labor;  as  a  drag  and  menace  and  a  prey 
to  the  very  existence  of  those  who  have  to  sell  their  labor  in  order  to  earn 
their  bread.  The  man  is  turned  out  to  starve,  and  whole  occupations  and 
pursuits  are  revolutionized  and  completely  destroyed  by  the  introduction  of 
machinery,  in  a  day,  in  an  hour  as  it  were.  I  have  known  it  to  be  the  case 
in  the  history  of  my  own  life — and  I  am  yet  a  young  man — that  whole  pur- 
suits and  occupations  have  been  wiped  out  by  the  invention  of  machinery. 

What  becomes  of  these  people?  Where  are  they?  They  become  compet- 
itors of  other  laborers  and  are  made  to  reduce  wages  and  increase  the  work 
hours.  Many  of  them  are  candidates  for  the  gibbet,  they  are  candidates  for 
your  prison  celis.  Build  more  penitentiaries ;  erect  new  scaffolds,  for  these 
men  are  upon  the  highway  of  crime,  of  misery,  of  death.  Your  honor,  there 
never  was  an  effect  without  a  cause.  The  tree  is  known  by  its  fruit.  So- 
cialists are  not  those  who  blindly  close  their  eyes  and  refuse  to  look,  and  who 
refuse  to  hear,  but  having  eyes  to  see,  they  see,  and  having  ears  to  hear,  they 
hear.  Look  at  this  capitalistic  system;  look  at  its  operation  upon  the  small 
business  men;  the  small  dealers,  the  middle  class.  Bradstreet's  tells  us  in 
last  year's  report  that  there  were  11,000  small  business  men  financially  de- 
stroyed during  the  past  twelve  months.  What  became  of  those  people? 
Where  are  they,  and  why  have  they  been  wiped  out?  Has  there  been  any 
less  wealth?  No;  that  which  they  possessed  has  simply  been  transferred  into 
the  hands  of  some  other  person.  Who  is  that  other?  It  is  he  who  has 
greater  capitalistic  facilities.  It  is  the  monopolist,  the  man  who  can  run 
corners,  who  can  create  rings  and  squeeze  these  men  to  death  and  wipe 
them  out  like  dead  flies  from  the  table  into  his  monopolistic  basket.  The 
middle  classes  destroyed  in  this  manner  join  the  ranks  of  the  proletariat. 
They  become  what?  They  seek  out  the  factory  gate,  they  seek  in  the  vari- 
ous occupations'  of  wage  labor  employment.  What  is  the  result?  Then  there 
are  more  men  upon  the  market.  This  increases  the  number  of  those  who 
are  applying  for  employment.  What  then?  This  intensifies  the  competition, 
which  in  turn  creates  greater  monopolists,  and  with  it  wages  go  down  until 
the  starvation  point  is  reached,  and  then  what?  Your  honor,  Socialism  comes 
to  the  people  and  asks  them  to  look  into  this  thing,  to  discuss  it,  to  reason, 
to  examine  it,  to  investigate  it,  to  know  the  facts,  because  it  is  by  this,  and 
this  alone,  that  violence  will  be  prevented  and  bloodshed  will  be  avoided ; 
because,  as  my  friend  here  has  said,  men  in  their  blind  rage,  in  their  igno- 
rance, not  knowing  what  ails  them,  knowing  that  they  are  hungry,  that  they 
are  miserable  and  destitute,  strike  blindly,  and  do  as  they  did  with  Maxwell 
here,  and  fight  the  labor  saving  machinery.  Imagine  such  an  absurd  thing, 
and  yet  the  capitalistic  press  has  taken  great  pains  to  say  that  Socialists  do 


72  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

these  things;  that  we  fight  machinery;  that  we  fight  property.  Why,  sir, 
it  is  an  absurdity;  it  is  ridiculous;  it  is  preposterous.  No  man  ever  heard 
an  utterance  from  the  mouth  of  a  Socialist  to  advise  anything  of  the  kind. 
They  knew  to  the  contrary.  We  don't  fight  machinery;  we  don't  oppose  the 
thing.  It  is  only  the  manner  and  methods  of  employing  them  that  we  ob- 
ject to.  That  is  all.  It  is  the  manipulations  of  these  things  in  the  interests 
of  a  few;  it  is  the  monopolization  of  them  that  we  object  to.  We  desire 
that  all  the  forces  of  nature,  all  the  forces  of  society,  of  the  gigantic  strength 
which  has  resulted  from  the  combined  intellect  and  labor  of  the  ages  of  the 
past  shall  be  turned  over  to  man,  and  made  his  servant,  his  obedient  slave 
forever.  This  is  the  object  of  Socialism.  It  asks  no  one  to  give  up  any- 
thing. It  seeks  no  harm  to  anybody.  But,  when  we  witness  this  condition 
of  things,  when  we  see  little  children  huddling  around  the  factory  gates, 
the  poor  little  things  whose  bones  are  not  yet  hard;  when  we  see  them 
clutched  from  the  hearthstone,  taken  from  the  family  altar,  carried  to  the 
bastiles  of  labor  and  their  little  bones  ground  up  into  gold  dust  to  bedeck 
the  form  ot  some  aristocratic  Jezebel,  then  it  stirs  us  and  we  speak  out. 
We  plead  for  the  little  ones ;  we  plead  for  the  helpless ;  we  plead  for  the 
oppressed;  we  seek  redress  for  those  who  are  wronged;  we  seek  knowledge 
and  intelligence  for  the  ignorant;  we  seek  liberty  for  the  slave.  Socialism 
secures  the  welfare  of  every  human  being. 

Your  honor,  if  you  will  permit  it,  I  would  like  to  stop  now  and  resume 
tomorrow  morning. 

The  court  here  adjourned  until  10  o'clock  the  following  day,  when  Mr. 
Parsons  resumed  his  address. 

Your  honor,  I  concluded  last  evening  at  that  portion  of  my  statement 
which  had  for  its  purpose  a  showing  of  the  operations  and  effects  of  our 
existing  social  system,  the  evils  which  naturally  flow  from  the  established 
social  relations,  which  are  founded  upon  the  economic  subjection  of  depend- 
ence of  the  man  of  labor  to  the  monopolizer  of  the  means  of  labor  and  the 
resources  of  life.  I  sought  in  this  connection  to  show,  that  all  the  ills  that 
afflict  society — social  miseries,  mental  degradations,  political  dependence — all 
resulted  from  the  economic  subjection  and  dependence  of  the  man  of  labor 
upon  the  monopolizer  of  the  means  of  existence;  and  as  long  as  the  cause 
remains  the  effect  must  certainly  follow.  I  pointed  out  what  Bradstreet's 
had  to  say  in  regard  to  the  destruction  of  the  middle  class  last  year.  As 
it  affects  the  small  dealers,  the  middle  class  men  of  our  shop  streets,  the 
influences  are  likewise  at  work  among  the  farming  classes. 

According  to  statistics  ninety  per  cent  of  the  farms  of  America  are  to- 
day under  mortgage.  The  man  who  a  fevr  years  ago  owned  the  soil  that  he 
worked,  is  today  a  tenant,  and  a  mortgage  js  placed  upon  his  soil,  and  when 
he,  the  farmer  whose  hand  tickles  the  earth  and  causes  it  to  blossom  as  the 
rose  and  bring  forth  its  rich  food  of  human  sustenance — even  while  this 
man  is  asleep,  the  interest  upon  his  mortgage  continues.  It  grows  and  it 
increases,  rendering  it  more  and  more  difficult  for  him  to  get  along  or  make 
his  living.  In  the  meantime  the  railway  corporations  place  upon  the  traffic 
all  that  it  will  bear.  The  Board  of  Trade  sharks  run  their  corners  until — 
what?  Until  it  occurs  as  stated  in  the  Chicago  Tribune  about  three  months 
ago,  that  a  freight  train  of  corn  from  Iowa  consigned  to  a  commission 
merchant  in  Chicago,  had  to  be  sold  for  less  than  the  cost  of  freight,  and 
there  was  a  balance  of  $3  due  the  commission  man  on  the  freight  after  he  had 
sold  the  corn.  The  freightage  upon  that  corn  was  three  dollars  more  than 
the  corn  brought  in  the  market.  So  it  is  with  the  tenant  farmers  of 
America.  Your  honor,  we  do  not  have  to  go  to  Ireland  to  find  the  evils 
of  landlordism.  We  do  not  have  to  cross  the  Atlantic  to  find  Lord  Lie- 
trim's  rackrenters,  or  landlords  who  evict  their  tenants.  We  have  them  all 
around  us.  There  is  Ireland  right  here  in  Chicago  and  everywhere  else  in 
this  country.  Look  at  Bridgeport  where  the  Irish  live !  Look !  Tenants  at 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  73 

will,  huddled  together  as  State's  Attorney  Grinnell  calls  them,  like  rats; 
living  as  they  do  in  Dublin,  living  precisely  as  they  do  in  Limerick — taxed 
to  death,  unable  to  meet  the  extortions  of  the  landlord. 

We  were  told  by  the  prosecution  that  law  is  on  trial;  that  government 
is  on  trial.  That  is  what  the  gentlemen  on  the  other  side  stated  to  the  jury. 
The  law  is  on  trial,  and  government  is  on  trial.  Well,  up  to  near  the  con- 
clusion of  this  trial  we,  the  defendants,  supposed  that  we  were  indicted  and 
being  tried  for  murder.  Now,  if  the  law  is  on  trial  and  if  the  government 
is  on  trial,  who  placed  it  upon  trial?  And  I  leave  it  to  the  people  of 
America  whether  the  prosecution  in  this  case  have  made  out  a  case;  and  I 
charge  it  here  now  frankly  that  in  order  to  bring  about  this  conviction  the 
prosecution,  the  representatives  of  the  State,  the  sworn  officers  of  the  law, 
those  whose  obligation  is  to  the  people  to  obey  the  law  and  preserve  order 
— I  charge  upon  them  a  willful,  a  malicious,  a  purposed  violation  of  every 
law  which  guarantees  a  right  to  American  citizens.  They  have  violated  free 
speech.  In  the  prosecution  of  this  case  they  have  violated  a  free  press.  They 
have  violated  the  right  of  public  assembly.  Yea,  they  have  even  violated 
and  denounced  the  right  of  self-defense.  I  charge  the  crime  home  to  them. 
These  great  blood  bought  rights,  for  which  our  forefathers  spent  centuries 
of  struggle,  it  is  attempted  to  run  them  like  rats  into  a  hole  by  the  prose- 
cution in  this  case.  Why,  gentlemen,  law  is  upon  trial;  government  is  upon 
trial,  indeed.  Yea,  they  are  themselves  guilty  of  the  precise  thing  of  which 
they  accuse  me.  They  say  that  I  am  an  Anarchist  and  refuse  to  respect  the 
law.  "By  their  works  ye  shall  know  them,"  and  out  of  their  own  mouths 
they  stand  condemned.  They  are  the  real  Anarchists  in  this  case,  while  we 
stand  upon  the  constitution  of  the  United  States.  I  have  violated  no  law 
of  this  country.  Neither  I  nor  my  colleagues  here  have  violated  any  legal 
right  of  American  citizens.  We  stand  upon  the  right  of  free  speech,  of  free 
press,  of  public  assemblage,  unmolested  and  undisturbed.  We  stand  upon 
the  constitutional  right  of  self-defense,  and  we  defy  the  prosecution  to  rob 
the  people  of  America  of  these  dearly  bought  rights.  But  the  prosecution 
imagines  that  they  have  triumphed  because  they  propose  to  put  to  death 
seven  men.  Seven  men  to  be  exterminated  in  violation  of  the  law,  because 
they  insist  upon  the  inalienable  rights  granted  them  by  the  constitution. 
Seven  men  are  to  be  exterminated,  because  they  demand  the  right  of  free 
speech  and  exercise  it.  Seven  men  by  this  court  of  law  are  to  be  put  to 
death,  because  they  claim  their  right  of  self-defense.  Do  you  think,  gentle- 
men of  the  prosecution,  that  you  will  have  settled  the  case  when  you  are 
carrying  my  lifeless  bones  to  the  potter's  field?  Do  you  think  that  this  trial 
will  be  settled  by  my  strangulation  and  that  of  my  colleagues?  I  tell  you 
that  there  is  a  greater  verdict  yet  to  be  heard  from.  The  American  people 
will  have  something  to  say  about  this  attempt  to  destroy  their  rights,  which 
they  hold  sacred.  The  American  people  will  have  something  to  say  as  to 
whether  or  not  the  constitution  of  this  country  can  be  trampled  under  foot 
at  the  dictation  of  monopoly  and  corporations  and  their  hired  tools. 

Your  honor  read  yesterday  your  reasons  for  refusing  us  a  new  trial,  and 
I  want  to  call  your  attention  to  it,  if  you  please,  on  some  points  on  which  I 
think  you  are  laboring  under  misapprehension.  Your  honor  says  that  there 
can  be  no  question  in  the  mind  of  any  one  who  has  read  these  articles  (re- 
ferring to  the  Alarm  and  Arbeit er-Zeitung),  or  heard  these  speeches,  which 
were  written  and  spoken  long  before  the  eight  hour  movement  was  talked 
of,  that  this  movement  which  we  advocated  was  but  a  means  in  our  esti- 
mation toward  the  ends  which  we  sought,  and  the  movement  itself  was  not 
primarily  of  any  consideration  at  all.  Now,  your  honor,  I  submit  that  you 
are  sitting  in  judgment  not  alone  upon  my  acts,  but  also  upon  my  motives. 
That  is  a  dangerous  thing  for  any  man  to  do;  any  man  is  so  liable  to  make 
a  mistake  in  a  matter  of  that  kind.  I  claim  that  it  would  not  be  fair,  for 
you  to  assume  to  state  what  my  motives  were  in  the  eight  hour  movement; 


74  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

that  I  was  simply  using  it  for  another  purpose.  How  do  you  know  that? 
Can  you  read  my  heart  and  order  my  actions?  If  you  go  by  the  record,  it 
will  disprove  your  honor's  conjecture,  because  it  is  a  conjecture! 

The  State's  attorney  has  throughout  this  trial  done  precisely  what  Mr. 
English,  the  reporter  of  the  Tribune,  said  he  was  instructed  to  do  by  the 
proprietor  of  ihe  Tribune,  when  he  attended  labor  meetings.  It  was  the 
custom  of  the  chief  editors  of  the  large  dailies  to  instruct  those  who  went 
to  labor  meetings  to  report  only  the  inflammatory  passages  of  the  speaker's 
remarks.  That  is  precisely  the  scheme  laid  out  by  the  prosecution.  They 
have  presented  you  here  copies  of  the  Alarm  running  back  for  three  years, 
and  my  speeches  covering  three  years  back.  They  have  selected  such  por- 
tions of  those  articles,  and  such  articles,  mark  you,  as  subserve  their  pur- 
pose; such  as  they  supposed  would  be  calculated  to  inflame  your  mind  and 
prejudice  you  and  the  jury  against  us.  You  ought  to  be  careful  of  this 
thing.  It  is  not  fair  or  right  for  you  to  conclude  that  from  the  showing 
made  by  these  gentlemen  we  were  not  what  we  pretended  to  be  in  this 
labor  movement.  Take  the  record.  Why,  I  am  well  known  throughout  the 
United  States  for  years  and  years  past  and  I  have  come  in  personal  contact 
with  hundreds  of  thousands  of  workingmen  from  Nebraska  in  the  West  to 
New  York  in  the  East,  and  from  Maryland  to  Wisconsin  and  Minnesota.  I 
have  traversed  the  states  for  the  past  ten  years,  and  I  am  known  by  hun- 
dreds and  thousands  who  have  seen  and  heard  me. 

Possibly  I  had  better  stop  a  moment,  and  explain  how  this  was.  These 
labor  organizations  sent  for  me.  Sometimes  it  was  the  Knights  of  Labor; 
sometimes  it  was  the  Trades  Unions;  sometimes  tl^e  Socialistic  organiza- 
tions; but  always  as  an  organizer  of  workingmen,  always  as  a  labor  speaker 
at  labor  meetings.  Now,  if  there  is  anything  for  which  I  am  well  known 
it  is  my  advocacy  of  the  eight  hour  system  of  labor;  so  it  is  with  my  col- 
leagues here.  But  because  I  have  said  in  this  connection  that  I  did  not  be- 
lieve it  would  be  possible  to  bring  about  a  reform  of  this  present  wage 
system,  because  of  the  fact  that  the  power  of  the  employing  class  is  so  great 
that  they  can  refuse  to  make  any  concessions,  you  say  that  I  had  no  inter- 
est in  the  eight  hour  movement.  Is  it  not  the  fact  that  the  present  social  sys- 
tem places  all  power  in  the  hands  of  the  capitalist  class?  They  can  and  do 
refuse  to  make  any  concessions,  and  where  they  grant  anything  they  retract 
it  when  they  choose  to  do  so.  They  can  do  it.  The  wage  system  gives 
them  the  power.  The  tyranny  and  the  despotism  of  the  wage  system  of  la- 
bor consists  in  the  fact  that  the  wage  laborer  is  compelled  under  penalty  of 
hunger  and  death  by  starvation  to  obey  and  accept  terms  laid  down  to  him 
by  his  employer.  Hence  1  have  pointed  out  that  it  might  be  difficult  for 
this  reason  to  establish  an  eight  hour  rule.  What  have  I  said  in  this  con- 
nection? I  have  said  to  the  employers,  to  the  manufacturers  and  the  cor- 
porations— the  monopolists  of  America :  "Gentlemen,  the  eight  hour  system 
of  labor  is  the  olive  branch  of  peace  held  out  to  you.  Take  it.  Concede 
this  moderate  demand  of  the  working  people.  Give  them  better  opportuni- 
ties. Let  them  possess  the  leisure  which  eight  hours  will  bring.  Let  it 
operate  on  the  wants  and  the  daily  habits  of  the  people."  I  have  talked  this 
way  to  the  rich  of  this  country  in  every  place  I  have  gone,  and  I  have  told 
them,  not  in  the  language  of  a  threat ;  not  in  the  language  of  intimidation ; 
I  have  said :  "If  you  do  not  concede  this  demand,  if,  on  the  other  hand,  you 
increase  the  hours  of  labor,  and  employ  more  and  more  machinery,  you 
thereby  increase  the  number  of  enforced  idle;  you  thereby  swell  the  army 
of  the  compulsory  idle  and  unemployed ;  you  create  new  elements  of  dis- 
content; you  increase  the  army  of  idleness  and  misery."  I  said  to  them: 
"This  is  a  dangerous  condition  of  things  to  have  in  a  country.  It  is  liable 
to  lead  to  violence.  It  will  drive  the  workers  into  revolution.  The  eight 
•hour  demand  is  a  measure  which  is  in  the  interest  of  humanity,  in  the  in- 
terest of  peace,  in  the  interest  of  prosperity  and  public  order." 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  75 

Now,  your  honor,  can  you  take  your  comments  there  and  say  that  we 
had  other  motives  and  ulterior  motives?  Your  impression  is  derived  from 
the  inflammatory  sections  and  articles  selected  by  the  prosecution  for  your 
honor  to  read.  I  think  I  know  what  my  motives  were,  and  I  am  stating 
them  deliberately  and  fairly  and  honestly,  leaving  you  to  judge  whether  or 
not  I  am  telling  the  truth.  You  say  that  "the  different  papers  and  the 
speeches  furnish  direct  contradiction  to  the  arguments  of  the  counsel  for  the 
defense  that  we  proposed  to  resort  to  arms  only  in  the  case  of  unlawful  at- 
tacks of  the  police."  Why,  the  very  article  that  you  quote  in  the  Alarm — a 
copy  of  which  I  have  not,  but  which  I  would  like  to  see,  calling  the  American 
Group  to  assemble  for  the  purpose  of  considering  military  matters  and  mili- 
tary organization,  states  specifically  that  the  purpose  and  object  is  to  take  in- 
to consideration  measures  of  defense  against  unlawful  and  unconstitutional 
attacks  of  the  police.  That  identical  article  shows  it.  You  forget  surely 
that  fact  when  you  made  this  observation ;  and  I  defy  any  one  to  show,  in  a 
speech  that  is  susceptible  of  proof,  by  proof,  that  I  have  ever  said  aught 
by  word  of  mcuth  or  by  written  article  except  in  self-defense.  Does  not  the 
constitution  of  the  country,  under  whose  flag  myself  and  my  forefathers 
were  born  for  the  last  260  years,  provide  that  protection,  and  give  me,  their 
descendant,  that  right?  Does  not  the  constitution  say  that  I,  as  an  American, 
have  a  right  to  keep  and  to  bear  arms?  I  stand  upon  that  right.  Let  me 
sec  if  this  court  will  deprive  me  of  it. 

Let  me  call  your  attention  to  another  point  here.  For  some  of  these 
articles  that  appear  in  the  Alarm,  I  am  no  more  responsible  than  is  the  editor 
of  any  other  paper.  And  I  did  not  write  everything  in  the  Alarm,  and  it 
might  be  possible  that  there  were  some  things  in  that  paper  which  I  am  not 
ready  to  endorse.  I  am  frank  to  admit  that  such  is  the  case.  I  suppose  you 
could  scarcely  find  an  editor  of  a  paper  in  the  world,  but  what  could  con- 
scientiously say  the  same  thing.  Now,  am  I  to  be  dragged  up  here  and  exe- 
cuted for  the  utterances  and  the  writings  of  other  men,  even  though  they 
were  published  in  the  columns  of  a  paper  of  which  I  was  the  editor?  Your 
honor,  you  must  remember  that  the  Alarm  was  a  labor  paper,  published  by 
the  International  Working  People's  Association,  belonging  to  that  body.  I 
was  elected  its  editor  by  the  organization,  and,  as  labor  editors  generally 
are,  I  was  handsomely  paid.  I  had  saw-dust  pudding  as  a  general  thing  for 
dinner.  My  salary  was  eight  dollars  a  week,  and  I  have  received  that  salary 
as  editor  of  the  Alarm  for  over  two  years  and  a  half — $8  a  week !  I  was 
paid  "by  the  association.  It  stands  upon  the  books.  Go  down  to  the  office 
and  consult  the  business  manager.  Look  over  the  record  in  the  book  and 
it  will  show  you  that  A.  R.  Parsons  received  $8  a  week  as  editor  of  the 
Alarm  for  over  two  years  and  a  half.  This  paper  belonged  to  the  organiza- 
tion. It  was  theirs.  They  sent  in  their  articles — Tom,  Dick  and  Harry; 
everybody  wanted  to  have  something  to  say,  and  I  had  no  right  to  shut  off 
anybody's  complaint.  The  Alarm  was  a  labor  paper,  and  it  was  specifically 
published  for  the  purpose  of  allowing  every  human  being  who  had  a  wrong 
to  ventilate  it ;  to  give  every  human  being  who  wore  the  chains  of  monopoly 
an  opportunity  to  clank  those  chains  in  the  columns  of  the  Alarm.  It  was  a 
free  press  organ.  It  was  a  free  speech  newspaper. 

But  your  honor  says :  "Oh,  well,  Parsons,  your  own  language,  your  own 
words,  your  own  statements  at  these  meetings — what  you  said."  Well,  pos- 
sibly I  have  said  some  foolish  things.  Who  has  not?  As  a  public  speaker 
probably  I  have  uttered  some  wild  and  possibly  incoherent  assertions.  Who, 
as  a  public  speaker,  has  not  done  so?  Now,  consider  for  a  moment.  Sup- 
pose, as  is  now  the  case  with  me,  here  I  see  little  children  suffering,  men 
and  women  starving.  There  I  see  others  rolling  in  luxury  and  wealth  and 
opulence,  out  of  the  unpaid-for  labor  of  the  laborers.  I  am  conscious  of 
this  fact.  I  see  the  streets  of  Chicago,  as  was  the  case  last  winter,  filled 
with  30,000  men  in  compulsory  idleness ;  destitution,  misery  and  want  upon 


76  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

every  hand.  I  see  this  thing.  Then  on  the  other  hand  I  see  the  First  Regi- 
ment out  in  a  street-riot  drill,  and  reading  the  papers  the  next  morning  de- 
scribing the  affair,  I  am  told  by  the  editor  of  the  capitalistic  newspaper  that 
the  First  Regiment  is  out  practicing  a  street-riot  drill  for  the  purpose  of 
mowing  down  these  wretches  when  they  come  out  of  their  holes  that  the 
prosecution  talks  about  here  in  this  case;  that  the  working  people  are  to  be 
slaughtered  in  cold  blood,  and  that  men  are  drilling  upon  the  streets  of  the 
cities  of  America  to  butcher  their  fellowmen  when  they  demand  the  right 
to  work  and  partake  of  the  fruits  of  their  labor.  Seeing  these  things,  over- 
whelmed as  it  were  with  indignation  and  pity,  my  heart  speaks.  May  I  not 
say  some  things  then  that  I  would  not  in  cooler  moments?  Are  not  such' 
outrageous  things  calculated  to  arouse  the  bitterest  denunciations? 

Your  honor,  I  want  to  call  your  attention  to  some  of  the  reasons  which  I 
propose  here  today  to  offer  in  justification  of  the  words  and  utterances,  and 
the  acts,  whatever  they  may  have  been,  of  myself,  or  my  colleagues,  on  the 
question  of  force,  on  the  question  of  arms,  and  on  the  question  of  dynamite. 
Now,  going  back  lo  1877,  what  do  we  find?  The  railroad  strikes  occurred. 
During  the  conflict  of  that  year  the  following  utterances  were  made  by  heavy 
employers  and  manufacturers  and  monopolists  in  this  country.  I  will  give 
you  a  few  samples.  This,  mark  you,  is  published  in  the  Alarm  of  November 
8,  1884,  but  the  same  extracts  have  been  kept  standing  in  the  labor  papers, 
published  by  the  Knights  of  Labor,  the  Trades  Unions,  and  the  Socialists  of 
the  United  States,  there  being  somewhere  over  three  hundred  of  these  papers. 
Now  listen:  "Give  them  (the  strikers)  a  rifle  diet  for  a  few  days,  and  see 
how  they  like  that  kind  of  bread,"  said  Tom  Scott,  president  of  the  Penn- 
sylvania Central  Railway,  addressing  Gov.  Hartranft  of  Pennsylvania,  and 
calling  upon  him  to  send  his  army  of  militiamen  to  Pittsburg,  to  put  down 
his  railroad  strikers,  who  were  asking  for  a  little  more  pay,  and  some  of 
them  asking  for  pay  enough  to  get  their  hungry  children  bread.  His  answer 
is,  "Give  them  a  ritle  diet  for  a  few  days  and  see  how  they  like  that  kind 
of  bread."  Mark  you,  this  was  in  1877.  "If  the  workingmen  had  no  vote 
they  might  be  more  amenable  to  the  teachings  of  the  times,"  says  the  Indian- 
apolis News.  "There  is  too  much  freedom  in  this  country  instead  of  too 
little,"  says  the  Indianapolis  Journal.  In  1878,  the  New  York  Tribune,  in  an 
editorial  upon  strikes,  used  these  words :  "These  brutal  strikers  or  creatures 
can  understand  no  other  meaning  than  that  of  force,  and  ought  to  have 
enough  of  it  to  be  remembered  among  them  for  many  generations."  "Hand 
grenades  should  be  thrown  among  these  Union  sailors  who  are  striving  to 
obtain  higher  wages  and  less  hours.  By  such  treatment  they  would  be  taught 
a  valuable  lesson,  and  other  strikers  could  take  warning  from  their  fate," 
said  the  Chicago  Times.  "It  is  very  well  to  relieve  real  distress  wherever 
it  exists,  whether  in  the  city  or  in  the  country,  but  the  best  meal  that  can 
be  given  a  ragged  tramp  is  a  leaden  one,  and  it  should  be  supplied  in  suf- 
ficient quantities  to  satisfy  the  most  voracious  appetite,"  New  York  Herald, 
1878.  "The  American  laborer  must  make  up  his  mind  to  be  not  so  much 
better  than  the  European  laborer.  He  must  be  contented  to  work  for  less 
wages  and  must  be  satisfied  with  that  station  in  life  to  which  it  has  pleased 
God  to  call  him."  The  New  York  World  uttered  these  sentiments  in  1878. 
I  could  go  through  the  whole  gamut  of  the  monopolistic  press  of  America 
and  show  similar  expressions  of  sentiment.  These  sentiments  were  used 
against  strikers,  against  men  who  were  simply  seeking  to  improve  their  con- 
dition. They  only  asked  for  less  hours  of  labor  and  for  increased  pay.  These 
are  the  bloody,  bitter  words  of  these  papers.  Now,  what  follows?  It  is  the 
experience  nowadays  and  has  been  since  that  time,  when  workingmen  strike, 
to  call  out  the  militia.  That  has  been  the  practice  since  these  utterances 
and  declarations  in  1878,  growing  out  of  the  great  railroad  strike.  It  has 
become  the  custom  in  America  to  call  out  the  militia  if  there  is  a  strike,  or 
even  if  there  is  one  contemplated.  Why,  look  at  the  packing  houses  in  the 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  77 

city  of  Chicago.  Only  yesterday  the  packing  house  bosses,  who  employ 
25,000  men,  called  for  an  army  of  Pinkerton  men  to -go  down  there,  and 
advertised  for  them  to  come.  That  was  before  there  was  a  strike — in  mere 
contemplation  cf  it,  your  honor.  This  in  America — the  United  States ! 
Why,  is  it  surprising  that  the  working  people  should  feel  indignant  about 
these  things  and  say  to  Mr.  Gould  or  to  Tom  Scott :  "If  you  are  going  to 
give  us  a  rifle  diet  instead  of  a  bread  diet,  as  was  asked  of  Christ,  when 
we  ask  you  for  bread  you  give  us  a  stone,  and  not  only  give  us  a  stone, 
but  at  the  point  of  the  bayonet  compel  us  to  swallow  it,  where  is  the  con- 
stitutional right  of  resistance  to  these  outrages?"  If  I  am  to  be  deprived  of 
my  rights  of  defense  against  the  administration  of  a  rifle  diet,  and  strych- 
nine put  upon  my  bread  and  food,  which  was  advocated  by  the  Chicago 
Tribune  when  it  said  that,  when  tramps  come  around  in  the  neighborhood, 
give  them  a  slice  of  bread  with  strychnine  upon  it,  and  other  tramps  will 
take  warning  and  keep  out  of  the  neighborhood;  if  I  am  to  be  deprived 
of  my  right,  what  shall  I  do?  Are  not  such  expressions  as  this  calculated 
to  exasperate  men?  Is  there  no  justification  for  that  which  you  denomi- 
nate violent  speeches?  Did  not  these  monopolists  bring  about  the  inception 
of  this  language?  Did  they  not  originate  it?  Were  they  not  the  first  to 
say :  "Throw  dynamite  bombs  amnog  the  strikers,  and  thereby  make  a 
warning  to  others?"  Was  it  not  Torn  Scott  who  first  said,  "Give  them  a 
rifle  diet?"  Was  it  not  the  Tribune  which  first  said,  "Give  them  strych- 
nine?" And  they  have  done  it.  Since  that  time  they  have  administered  a 
rifle  diet;  they  have  administered  strychnine.  They  have  thrown  hand 
grenades,  and  the  hand  grenade  upon  the  Haymarket  on  the  night  of  the 
4th  of  May  was  thrown  by  the  hand  of  a  monopolist  conspirator  sent  from 
the  city  of  New  York  for  that  specific  purpose,  to  break  up  the  eight  hour 
movement  and  bring  these  men  to  the  gallows  in  this  court.  Your  honor, 
we  are  the  victims  of  the  foulest  and  blackest  conspiracy  that  ever  dis- 
graced the  annals  of  time.  If  these  men  will  preach  these  things;  if  the 
Tribune  thinks  that  strychnine  is  good  enough  for  us ;  if  the  Times  thinks 
that  hand  grenades  are  good  enough  for  us,  why  have  we  not  got  a  right 
to  say  they  will  use  it?  They  say  they  believe  in  it.  They  say  they  think 
it.  What  right  have  we  to  say  that  they  will  not  hire  some  mercenary  to 
carry  out  what  they  think,  and  put  into  practice  that  which  they  believe? 

In  this  connection  I  want  to  call  your  attention  to  the  way  armed  men, 
militiamen  and  Pinkerton's  private  army  are  used  against  workingmen, 
strikers ;  the  way  they  are  used  to  shoot  them,  to  arrest  them,  to  put  up  jobs 
on  them  and  carry  them  out.  In  the  Alarm  of  Oct.  17,  1885,  there  is  printed 
the  following :  "Pinkerton's  Army.  They  issue  a  Secret  Circular  Offering 
Their  Services  to  Capitalists  for  the  Suppression  of  Strikers.  The  secretary 
of  the  Minneapolis,  Minn.,  Trades  and  Labor  Assembly  sends  us  the  fol- 
lowing note :  Minneapolis,  Minn.,  October  6,  1885.  Editor  of  the  Alarm. 
Dear  Sir:  Please  pay  your  respects  to  the  Pinkerton  pups  for  their  ex- 
treme kindness  to  labor.  Try  to  have  the  government  of  your  city  do  away 
with  its  metropolitan  police  and  employ  Pinkerton  protectors."  (Of  course 
this  is  sarcastic.)  "The  inclosed  circular  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  Minne- 
apolis Trades  Assembly,  which  thought  it  not  out  of  place  to  pass  it  around. 
Please  insert  it  in  your  paper.  Yours  fraternally,  T.  W.  Brosnan."  That 
letter  is  under  the  seal  of  the  Trade  and  Labor  Assembly  of  the  city  of 
Minneapolis,  Minn.  Then  follows  the  circular.  Then,  after  referring  to  the 
services  rendered  the  capitalists,  corporations,  and  monopolists  during  the 
strikes  in  all  parts  of  the  country  during  the  past  year,  the  circular  closes 
with  the  following  paragraphs,  which  we  give  in  full  as  illustrative  of  the 
designs  of  these  secret  enemies  upon  organized  labor.  Let  every  working- 
man  ponder  over  the  avowed  purposes  of  these  armies  of  thugs.  It  says: 
"The  Pinkerton  Protective  Patrol  is  connected  with  Pinkerton's  National 
Detective  Agency,  and  is  under  the  same  management.  Corporations  or  in- 


78  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

dividuals  desirous  of  ascertaining  the  feelings  of  their  employees,  whether 
they  are  likely  to  engage  in  strikes  or  are  joining  any  secret  labor  organiza- 
tions, such  as  the  Knights  of  Labor,  with  a  view  of  compelling  terms  from 
corporations  or  employers,  can  obtain  upon  application  to  the  superintendent 
of  either  of  the  offices  a  detective  suitable  to  associate  with  their  employees 
and  obtain  this  information."  This  circular  continues :  "At  this  time, 
when  there  is  so  much  dissatisfaction  among  the  labor  classes,  and  secret 
labor  societies  are  organizing  throughout  the  United  States,  we  suggest 
whether  it  would  not  be  well  for  railroad  companies  and  other  corporations, 
as  well  as  individuals  who  are  extensive  employers,  to  keep  a  close  watch 
for  designing  men  among  their  own  employees,  who,  in  the  interest  of  secret 
labor  societies,  are  influencing  their  employees  to  join  these  organizations 
and  eventually  cause  a  strike.  It  is  frequently  the  case  that,  by  taking  a 
matter  of  this  kind  in  time,  and  discovering  the  ring-leaders,  and  dealing 
promptly  with  them" — "discovering  the  ring-leaders,"  mark  you,  "and  dealing 
promptly  with  them,  serious  trouble  may  be  avoided  in  the  future.  Yours 
respectfully,  William  A.  Pinkerton,  General  Superintendent  Western  Agency, 
Chicago;  Robert  A.  Pinkerton,  General  Superintendent  Eastern  Division, 
New  York." 

Now,  here  is  a  concern,  an  institution  which  organizes  a  private  army. 
This  private  army  is  at  the  command  and  control  of  those  who  grind  the 
faces  of  the  poor,  who  keep  wages  down  to  the  starvation  point.  This  pri- 
vate army  can  be  shipped  to  the  place  where  they  are  wanted.  Now  it  goes 
to  the  Hocking  Valley  to  subjugate  the  starving  miners ;  then  it  is  carried 
across  the  plains  to  Nebraska  to  shoot  the  striking  miners  in  that  region. 
Then  it  is  carried  to  the  east  to  stop  the  strike  of  the  factory  operatives 
and  put  them  down.  The  army  moves  about  to  and  fro  all  over  the  country, 
sneaks  into  the  labor  organizations,  worms  itself  into  these  labor  societies, 
finds  out,  as  it  says,  who  the  ring-leaders  are  and  deals  promptly  with  them. 
"Promptly,"  your  honor,  "with  them."  Now,  what  does  that  mean?  It 
means  this :  that  some  workingman  who  has  got  the  spirit  of  a  man  in  his 
organization,  who  gets  up  and  speaks  out  his  sentiments,  protests,  you  know, 
objects,  won't  have  it,  don't  like  these  indignities  and  says  so,  is  set  down 
as  a  ring-leader,  and  these  spies  go  to  work  and  put  up  a  job  on  him.  If 
they  cannot  aggravate  him  and  make  him,  as  the  New  York  Tribune  says, 
violate  the  law  so  they  can  get  hold  of  him,  they  go  to  work  and  put  up  a 
scheme  on  him,  and  concoct  a  conspiracy  that  will  bring  him  into  court. 
When  he  is  brought  into  court  he  is  a  wage  slave;  he  has  no  friends,  he  has 
got  no  money — who  is  he?  Why,  he  stands  here  at  the  bar  like  a  culprit. 
He  has  neither  position,  wealth,  honor,  nor  friends  to  defend  him.  What 
is  the  result?  Why,  sixty  days  at  the  Bridewell  or  a  year  in  the  county  jail. 
The  matter  is  dismissed  with  a  wave  of  the  hand.  The  bailiff  carries  the 
ring-leader  out.  The  strike  is  suppressed.  Monopoly  triumphs  and  the 
Pinkertons  have  performed  the  work  for  which  they  receive  their  pay.  Now, 
it  was  these  things  that  caused  the  American  Group  to  take  an  exceeding 
interest  in  this  manner  of  treatment  on  the  part  of  the  corporations  and 
monopolies  of  the  country,  and  we  became  indignant  about  it.  We  expos- 
tulated, we  denounced  it.  Could  we  do  otherwise?  We  are  a  part  and  par- 
cel of  the  miseries  brought  about  by  this  condition  of  things.  Could  we  do 
otherwise  than  expostulate  and  object  to  it  and  resent  it?  Now,  to  illus- 
trate what  we  did,  I  will  read  to  you  from  the  Alarm,  December  12,  1885, 
the  proceedings  of  the  American  Group,  of  which  I  was  a  member,  as  a 
sample.  I  being  present  at  that  meeting,  and  that  meeting  being  reported 
in  this  paper,  1  hold  that  this  report  of  the  meeting,  being  put  into  the 
Alarm  at  that  time,  is  worthy  of  your  credence  and  respect,  as  showing 
what  our  attitude  was  upon  the  question  of  force  and  of  arms  and  of 
dynamite.  The  article  is  headed  "Street  Riot  Drill.  Mass  Meeting  of 
Working  People  HeM  at  106  East  Randolph  Street."  This  was  the  regular 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  79 

hall  and  place  of  meeting.  The  article  reads :  "A  large  mass  meeting  of 
workingmen  and  women  was  held  by  the  American  Group  of  the  Inter- 
national last  Wednesday  evening  at  their  hall,  106  East  Randolph  street. 
The  subject  under  discussion  was  the  street-riot  drill  of  the  First  Regiment 
on  Thanksgiving  day.  William  Holmes  presided.  The  principal  speaker 
of  the  evening  was  Mrs.  Lucy  E.  Parsons.  She  began  by  saying  that  the 
founders  of  this  republic,  whose  motto  was  that  every  human  being  was 
by  nature  entitled  to  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness,  would  turn 
in  their  graves  if  they  could  read  and  know  that  a  great  street-riot  drill 
was  now  being  practiced  in  times  of  peace.  'Let  us/  said  she,  'examine  into 
this  matter  and  ascertain,  if  we  can,  what  this  street-riot  drill  of  the  military 
is  for.  Certainly  not  for  the  purpose  of  fighting  enemies  from  without; 
not  for  a  foreign  foe,  for  if  this  was  the  case  we  would  be  massing  our 
armies  on  the  sea-coast.  Then  it  must  be  for  our  enemies  within.  Now, 
then,  do  a  contented,  prosperous,  and  happy  people  leave  their  avocations 
and  go  out  upon  the  streets  to  riot?  Do  young  men  and  maidens  who  are 
marrying  and  given  in  marriage  forsake  the  peaceful  paths  of  life  to  become 
a  riotous  mob?  Then  who  is  this  street-riot  drill  for?  For  whom  is  it 
intended?  Who  is  to  be  shot?  When  the  tramp  of  the  military  is  heard, 
and  grape  and  canister  are  sweeping  four  streets  at  a  time,  as  is  contem- 
plated by  this  new-fangled  drill  which  was  so  graphically  described  "in  the 
capitalistic  paper  which  gave  an  account  of  it,  it  is  certainly  not  for  the 
purpose  of  shooting  down  the  bourgeoisie,  the  wealthy,  because  this  same 
'press  makes  a  stirring  appeal  to  them  to  contribute  liberally  to  a  military 
fund  to  put  them  on  a  good  footing  and  make  the  militia  twice  as  strong 
as  it  is  'at  present,  because  their  services  would  soon  be  needed  to  shoot 
down  the  mob.'  The  speaker  then  read  an  extract  from  a  capitalistic  ac- 
count of  the  street-riot  drill  on  Thanksgiving  day." 

Your  honor,  this  meeting  was  held  the  week  following  Thanksgiving 
day,  and  the  drill  took  place  on  Thanksgiving  day.  This  article,  which  is  a 
description  of  the  drill  copied  from  a  capitalistic  paper,  reads  as  follows: 
"As  a  conclusion  the  divisions  were  drawn  up  in  line  of  battle  and  there 
was  more  firing  by  companies,  by  file  and  by  battalion.  The  drill  was  cred- 
itable to  the  regiment,  and  the  First  will  do  excellent  service  in  the  streets 
in  case  of  necessity.  Opportunities,  however,  are  needed  for  rifle  practice, 
and  Colonel  Knox  is  anxious  to  have  a  range  established  as  soon  as  pos- 
sible. Instead  of  400  members,  the  regiment  should  have  800  members  on 
its  rolls.  Business  men  should  take  more  interest  in  the  organization  and 
help  put  it  in  the  best  possible  condition  to  cope  with  a  mob,  for  there  may 
be  need  for  its  service  at  no  distant  day."  That  article  appeared  either  in 
the  Times  or  Tribune  of  the  next  day.  I  don't  know  which.  The  speaker 
says :  "What  must  be  the  thought  of  the  oppressed  in  foreign  lands  when 
they  hear  the  tramp  of  the  militia  beneath  the  folds  of  the  stars  and  stripes? 
They  who  first  hung  this  flag  to  the  breeze,  proclaimed  that  beneath  its 
folds  the  oppressed  of  all  lands  would  find  a  refuge  and  a  haven  and  pro- 
tection against  the  despotism  of  all  lands.  Is  this  the  case  today  when  the 
counter-tramp  of  two  millions  of  homeless  wanderers  is  heard  throughout! 
the  land  of  America ;  men  strong  and  able  and  anxious  and  willing  to  work, 
that  they  may  purchase  for  themselves  and  their  families  food ;  when  the 
cry  of  discontent  is  heard  from  the  working  classes  everywhere,  and  they 
refuse  longer  to  starve,  and  peaceably  accept  a  rifle  diet  and  die  in  misery 
according  to  law,  and  order  is  enforced  by  this  military  drill?  Is  this  mili- 
tary drill  for  the  purpose  of  sweeping  them  down  as  a  mob  with  grape  and 
canister  upon  the  street?"  This  is  the  language  of  the  speaker  at  the  meet- 
ing :  "We  working  people  hear  these  ominous  rumblings,  which  create  in- 
quiry as  to  their  origin.  A  few  years  ago  we  heard  nothing  of  this  kind ; 
but  great  changes  have  taken  place  during  the  past  generation.  Charles 
Dickens,  who  visited  America  forty  years  ago,  said  that  what  surprised  him 


80  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

most  was  the  general  prosperity  and  equality  of  all  people,  and  that  a 
beggar  upon  the  streets  of  Boston  would  create  as  much  consternation  as  an 
angel  with  a  flaming  sword.  What  of  Boston  today?  Last  winter,  said 
a  correspondent  of  the  Chicago  Tribune,  writing  from  that  city,  30,000  per- 
sons were  destitute,  and  there  were  whole  streets  of  tenement  houses  where 
the  possession  of  a  cooking  stove  was  regarded  as  a  badge  of  aristocracy, 
the  holes  of  which  were  rented  to  other  less  wealthy  neighbors  for  a  few 
pennies  per  hour. 

"So,  too,  with  New  York,  Chicago  and  every  other  industrial  center  in 
this  broad  land.  Why  is  this?  Have  we  had  a  famine?  Has  nature  refused 
to  yield  her  harvest?  These  are  grave  and  serious  questions  for  us,  the 
producers  and  sufferers,  to  consider,  at  least.  Take  a  glance  at  the  wealth 
of  this  country.  In  the  past  twenty  years  it  has  increased  over  twenty 
billions  of  dollars.  Into  whose  hands  has  this  wealth  found  its  way?  Cer- 
tainly not  the  hands  of  the  producers,  for  if  it  had  there  would  be  no  need 
for  street-riot  drills.  This  country  has  a  population  of  55,000,000,  and  a 
statistical  compilation  shows  that  there  are  in  the  cities  of  New  York,  Phila- 
delphia and  Boston  twenty  men  who  own  as  their  private  property  over 
$750,000,000,  or  about  one-twenty-sixth  of  the  entire  increase  which  was 
produced  by  the  labor  of  the  working  class,  these  twenty  individuals  being 
as  one  in  three  millions.  In  twenty  years  these  profit-mongers  have  fleeced 
the  people  of  the  enormous  sum  of  $750,000,000,  and  only  three  cities  and 
twenty  robbers  heard  from.  A  government  that  protects  this  plundering  of 
the  people,  a  government  which  permits  the  people  to  be  degraded  and. 
brought  to  misery  in  this  manner  is  a  fraud  upon  the  face  of  it,  no  matter 
under  what  name  it  is  called,  or  what  flag  floats  over  it ;  whethec  it  be  a 
republic  or  a  monarchy,  or  an  empire,"  said  the  speaker.  "The  American 
flag  protects  as  much  economic  despotism  as  any  other  flag  on  the  face 
of  the  earth  today  to  the  ratio  of  population.  This  being  the  case,  of  what 
does  the  boasted  freedom  of  the  American  workingmen  consist?  Our 
fathers  used  to  sing, 

'Come  along,  come  along;   make  no  delay; 
Come  from  every  nation,  come  from  every  way; 
Come   along,   come   along;    don't  be   alarmed — 
Uncle  Sam  is  rich  enough  to  give  us  all  a  farm.' 

The  stars  and  stripes  in  those  days  floated  upon  every  water  as  the  emblem 
of  the  free,  but  today  it  obeys  only  the  command,  and  has  become  the 
ensign  of  monopoly  and  of  corporations,  of  those  who  grind  the  faces  of 
the  poor  and  rob  and  enslave  the  laborer.  Could  Russia  do  more  than  drill 
in  its  streets  to  kill  the  people?  But  alas!  Americans  creep  and  crawl  at 
the  foot  of  wealth  and  adore  the  golden  calf.  Can  a  man  amass  millions 
without  despoiling  the  labor  of  others?  We  all  know  he  cannot.  American 
workingmen  seem  to  be  degenerating.  They  do  not  seem  to  understand 
what  liberty  and  freedom  really  consist  of.  They  shout  themselves  hoarse 
on  election  day — for  what?  For  the  miserable  privilege  of  choosing  their 
master;  which  man  shall  be  their  boss  and  rule  over  them;  for  the  privi- 
lege of  choosing  just  who  are  the  bosses  and  who  shall  govern  them.  Great 
privilege !  These  Americans — sovereigns — millions  of  them  do  not  know 
where  they  could  get  a  bed  or  a  supper.  Your  ballot — what  is  it  good  for? 
Can  a  man  vote  himself  bread,  or  clothes,  or  shelter,  or  work?  In  what 
does  American  wage  slaves'  freedom  consist?  The  poor  are  the  slaves  of 
the  rich  everywhere.  The  ballot  is  neither  a  protection  against  hunger  nor 
against  the  bullets  of  the  military.  Bread  is  freedom ;  freedom  bread.  The 
ballot  is  no  protection  against  the  bullets  of  those  who  are  practicing  the 
street-riot  drills  in  Chicago.  The  ballot  is  worthless  to  the  industrial  slave 
tinder  these  conditions.  The  palaces  of  the  rich  overshadow  the  homes  or 
huts  of  the  poor,  and  we  say  with  Victor  Hugo,  that  the  paradise  of  the 
rich  is  made  out  of  the  hells  of  the  poor.  The  whole  force  of  the  organized 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  81 

power  of  the  government  is  thrown  against  the  workers,  whom  the  so- 
called  better  class  denominates  a  mob.  Now,  when  the  workers  of  America 
refuse  to  starve  according  to  law  and  order,  and  when  they  begin  to  think 
and  act,  why,  the  street  drill  begins.  The  enslavers  of  labor  see  the  coming 
storm.  They  are  determined,  cost  what  it  may,  to  drill  these  people  and 
make  them  their  slaves  by  holding  in  their  possession  the  means  of  life  as 
their  property,  and  thus  enslave  the  producers.  Workingmen — we  mean 
women,  too — arise !  Prepare  to  make  and  determine  successfully  to  estab- 
lish the  right  to  live  and  partake  of  the  bounties  to  which  all  are  equally 
entitled.  Agitate,  organize,  prepare  to  defend  your  life,  your  liberty,  your 
happiness  against  the  murderers  who  are  practicing  the  street  riot  drill  on 
Thanksgiving  day. 

"  'Tis  the  shame  of  the  land  that  the  earnings  of  toil 
Should  gorge  the  god  Mammon,  the  tyrant,  the  spoiler. 

Every  foot  has  a  logical  right  to  the  soil, 

And  the  product  of  toil  is  the  meed  of  the  toiler. 

"The   hands    that   disdain 
Honest  industry's  stain 

Have  no  share  in  its  honor,  no  right  to  Its  gain, 
And  the  falsehood  of  Wealth  over  Worth  shall  not  be 
In  'the  home  of  the  brave  and  the  land-of  the  free.' 

"Short  addresses  were  made  by  comrades  Fielden,  Dr.  Taylor,  William 
Snyder,  William  Holmes,  and  others.  This  concluded  the  meeting,  after 
criticisms." 

Now,  I  challenge  your  honor,  to  find  a  sentence  or  an  utterance  in  that 
meeting — and  that  is  one  of  the  fullest  reported  of  the  many  meetings  held 
by  the  American  Group  for  public  discussion  of  such  matters  as  the  Thanks- 
giving drill  of  the  First  Regiment — I  challenge  you  to  find  a  single  word 
or  utterance  there  that  is  unlawful,  that  is  contrary  to  the  constitution,  or 
that  is  in  violation  of  free  speech,  or  that  is  in  violation  of  free  press,  or 
that  is  in  violation  of  public  assembly  or  of  the  right  of  self-defense.  And 
that  is  our  position,  and  has  been  all  the  while.  Imagine  for  a  moment,  the 
First  Regiment  practicing  the  street-riot  drill  as  it  was  described — learning 
how  to  sweep  four  streets  from  the  four  corners  at  once.  Who?  The 
Tribune  and  Times  say  "the  mob."  Who  are  the  mob?  Why,  dissatisfied 
people,  dissatisfied  workingmen  and  women ;  people  who  are  working  for 
starvation  wages,  people  who  are  on  a  strike  for  better  pay — these  are 
the  mob.  They  are  always  the  mob.  That  is  what  the  riot  drill  is  for. 
Suppose  a  case  like  that  occurs.  The  First  Regiment  is  out  with  a  thousand 
men  armed  with  the  latest  improved  Winchester  rifles.  Here  are  the  mobs ; 
here  are  the  Knights  of  Labor  and  the  Trades  Unions,  and  all  of  the 
organizations  without  arms.  They  have  no  treasury,  and  a  Winchester  rifle 
costs  $18.  They  cannot  purchase  those  things.  We  cannot  organize  an 
army.  It  takes  capital  to  organize  an  army.  It  takes  as  much  money  to 
organize  an  army  as  to  organize  industry,  or  to  build  railroads ;  therefore, 
it  is  impossible  for  the  working  classes  to  organize  and  buy  Winchester 
rifles.  What  can  they  do?  What  must  they  do?  Your  honor,  the  dyna- 
mite bomb,  I  am  told,  costs  six  cents.  It  can  be  made  by  anybody.  The 
Winchester  rifle  costs  $18.  That  is  the  difference.  Am  I  to  be  blamed 
for  that?  Am  I  to  be  hanged  for  saying  this?  Am  I  to  be  destroyed 
for  this?  What  have  I  done?  Go,  dig  up  the  ashes  of  the  man  who  in- 
vented this  thing.  Find  his  ashes  and  scatter  them  to  the  winds,  because 
he  gave  this  power  to  the  world.  It  was  not  I.  General  Sheridan — he  is 
the  commander  in  chief  of  the  United  States  army,'  and  in  his  report  to 
the  president  and  congress  two  years  ago  he  had  occasion  to  speak  of  the 
possible  labor  trouble  that  may  occur  in  the  country,  and  what  did  he  say? 
In  this  report  he  says  that  dynamite  was  a  lately  discovered  article  of  tre- 
mendous power,  and  such  was  its  nature  that  people  could  carry  it  around 


82  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

in  the  pockets  of  their  clothing  with  perfect  safety  to  themselves,  and  by 
means  of  it  they  could  destroy  whole  cities  and  whole  armies.  This  was 
General  Sheridan.  That  is  what  he  said.  We  quoted  that  language  and 
referred  to  it.  I  want  to  say  another  word  about  dynamite  before  I  pass 
on  to  something  else.  I  am  called  a  dynamiter  by  the  prosecution  here. 
Why?  Did  I  ever  use  dynamite?  No.  Did  I  ever  have  any?  No.  Do  I 
know  anything  about  dynamite  bombs?  No.  Why,  then,  am  I  called  a 
dynamiter?  Listen,  and  I  will  tell  you.  Gunpowder  in  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury marked  an  era  in  the  world's  history.  It  was  the  d&wnfall  of  the  mail 
armor  of  the  knight,  the  freebooter,  and  the  robber  of  that  period.  It 
enabled  the  victims  of  these  highway  robbers  to  stand  off  at  a  distance  in  a 
safe  place  and  defend  themselves  by  the  use  of  gunpowder,  and  make  a 
ball  enter  and  pierce  into  the  flesh  of  their  robbers  and  destroyers.  Gun- 
powder came  as  a  democratic  instrument.  It  came  as  a  republican  insti- 
tution, and  the  effect  was  that  it  immediately  began  to  equalize  and  bring 
about  an  equilibrium  of  power.  There  was  less  power  in  the  hands  of  the 
nobility  after  that ;  less  power  in  the  hands  of  the  king ;  less  power  in  the 
hands  of  those  who  would  plunder  and  degrade  and  destroy  the  people  after 
that. 

So  today  dynamite  comes  as  the  emancipator  of  man  from  the  domi- 
nation and  enslavement  of  his  fellowman.  [The  judge  showed  symptoms 
of  impatience.]  Bear  with  me  now.  Dynamite  is  the  diffusion  of  power. 
It  is  democratic;  it  makes  everybody  equal.  General  Sheridan  says  "arms 
are  worthless."  They  are  worthless  in  the  presence  of  this  instrument. 
Nothing  can  meet  it.  The  Pinkertons,  the  police,  the  militia,  are  absolutely 
worthless  in  the  presence  of  dynamite.  They  can  do  nothing  with  the  peo- 
ple at  all.  It  is  the  equilibrium.  It  is  the  annihilator.  It  is  the  dissemi- 
nator of  power.  It  is  the  downfall  of  oppression.  It  is  the  abolition  of 
authority;  it  is  the  dawn  of  peace;  it  is  the  end  of  war,  because  war  cannot 
exist  unless  there  is  somebody  to  make  war  upon,  and  dynamite  makes  that 
unsafe,  undesirable,  and  absolutely  impossible.  It  is  a  peace-maker;  it  is 
man's  best  and  last  friend ;  it  emancipates  the  world  from  the  domineering 
of  the  few  over  the  many,  because  all  government,  in  the  last  resort,  is 
violence ;  all  law,  in  the  last  resort,  is  force.  Everything  is  based  upon 
force.  Force  is  the  law  of  the  universe;  force  is  the  law  of  nature,  and 
this  newly  discovered  force  makes  all  men  equal  and  therefore  free.  It  is 
idle  to  talk  of  rights  when  one  does  not  possess  the  power  to  enforce  them. 
Science  has  now  given  every  human  being  that  power.  It  is  proposed  by 
the  prosecution  here  to  take  me  by  force  and  strangle  me  on  the  gallows 
for  these  things  I  have  said,  for  these  expressions.  Now,  force  is  the  last 
resort  of  tyrants;  it  is  the  last  resort  of  despots  and  of  oppressors,  and  he 
who  would  strangle  another  because  that  other  does  not  believe  as  he 
would  have  him,  he  who  will  destroy  another  because  that  other  will  not 
do  as  he  says,  that  man  is  a  despot  and  a  tyrant  and  unworthy  to  live. 

Now,  I  speak  plainly.  Does  it  follow,  because  I  hold  these  views  that 
I  committed  this  act  at  the  Haymarket?  Does  that  follow?  Why,  you  might 
just  as  consistently  charge  General  Phil.  Sheridan  with  the  act,  and  for  the 
same  reason,  for  while  he  did  not  go  into  the  matter  perhaps  as  extensively 
in  his  encomium  upon  dynamite  as  I  have  done,  yet  he  furnished  me  the 
text  from  which  I  have  drawn  my  knowledge  of  this  thing. 

But,  you  say,  my  speeches  were  sometimes  extravagant,  unlawful.  Dur- 
ing the  discussion  of  the  question  of  the  extension  of  chattel  slavery  into 
the  new  territories,  into  Kansas  and  the  west,  while  Charles  Sumner  was 
yet  a  member  of  the  United  States  senate,  and  that  gallant  man  stood  as 
the  champion  of  freedom  upon  that  floor,  he  was  expostulated  with  on 
one  occasion  and  reprimanded  by  a  friend,  who  said  to  him :  "Sumner,  you 
are  not  expedient ;  you  must  have  more  policy  about  what  you  say,  you 
should  not  express  yourself  in  this  manner;  you  should  not  be  so  denun- 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  83 

ciatory  and  fanciful  against  this  slavery,  this  enslavement.  I  know  it  is 
wrong;  I  know  it  should  be  denounced,  but  keep  inside  of  the  law;  keep 
inside  of  the  constitution." 

Your  honor,  I  quote  from  the  speech  of  Charles  Sumner,  that  great 
American,  in  answer  and  in  reply  to  that  remark.  Said  he:  "Anything  for 
human  rights  is  constitutional.  No  learning  in  books,  no  skill  acquired  in 
courts,  no  sharpness  in  forensic  dealings,  no  cunning  in  splitting  hairs  can 
impair  the  vigor  thereof.  This  is  the  supreme  law  of  the  land,  anything 
in  the  constitution  or  laws  of  any  State  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding."  I 
never  said  anything  that  could  equal  that  in  lawlessness.  Go,  gentlemen  of 
the  prosecution,  dig  up  the  ashes  of  Sumner  and  scatter  them  in  disgrace 
to  the  winds,  tear  down  the  monument  that  the  American  people  have  erected 
to  his  honor,  and  erect  thereon  some  emblem  of  your  contempt! 

I  will  read  you  now  an  extract  from  the  Alarm,  a  little  editorial :  "Any 
pretense  called  freedom,  however  loudly  heralded,  which  does  not  bring 
peace,  plenty  and  comfort  to  all  the  members  of  the  human  race,  is  a  lie 
and  a  fraud  on  the  face  of  it."  Another  expression  from  the  Alarm — a 
little  editorial:  "A  man  gets  rich  by  meanness  and  poor  because  he  is 
generous.  How  long  can  we  tolerate  the  vile  system  which  rewards  mean- 
ness and  starves  generosity?" 

Your  honor,  one  of  the  most  startling  facts  in  connection  with  this 
trial,  the  labor  movement,  and  the  general  situation  of  affairs  is  to  be 
found  in  the  fact  .that  during  the  last  two  or  three  years  at  least  one-half 
of  the  large  industrial  establishments  of  the  United  States,  the  larger  cor- 
porations, monopolies,  and  industries,  have  been  conducted  under  military 
supervision.  A  startling  fact  this  is.  Armed  men,  armed  guards,  either 
the  Pinkertons  or  the  police,  the  police  of  the  municipalities  in  the  cities,  or 
the  militia,  or  the  United  States  army,  as  has  been  done  in  some  cases,  are 
supervising  one-half  of  the  industries  of  America,  that  is,  the  larger  indus- 
tries. It  is  a  positive  fact.  Think  of  this !  Who  is  doing  this  t  Now,  as  an 
offset  to  this  state  of  affairs,  we  find  1,200  delegates  assembled  in  Richmond, 
Va.,  representing  our  American  workingmen  in  the  convention  of  the 
Knights  of  Labor.  That  congress,  that  organization  is  the  reply  which  is 
being  made  by  peaceable  laborers  to  the  rifle  diet  advice,  the  strychnine 
business,  and  the  hand  grenade  business,  and  club  business  advice  by  the 
Chicago,  New  York,  Philadelphia,  and  other  large  papers  in  this  country. 
These  men  are  assembled  in  self-defense.  The  conflict  is  the  struggle  be- 
tween liberty  and  authority — authority  in  any  and  every  form.  Those  who 
are  in  authority  tell  the  workingmen  that  if  they  want  to  enjoy  the  law 
and  the  protection  of  the  law,  they  must  render  a  cheerful  obedience  to  the 
law.  Why  a  man,  when  he  flogs  his  slave  for  disobedience,  tells  him  the 
same  thing.  Your  honor,  according  to  your  construction  of  sentence,  or  the 
reason  which  you  propose  as  a  portion  of  the  ground  work  upon  which 
you  expect  to  render  your  proposed  sentence,  you  deny  the  right  of  Amer- 
icans to  defend  themselves  against  the  rifle  diet,  and  to  protest  against  these 
outrageous  things,  to  object  to  the  strychnine  business.  These  are  the  things 
that  have  made  us  what  we  are.  If  there  be  any  wrong  in  me  I  am  the 
product  of  these  conditions.  I  am  the  creature  of  circumstances ;  I  am  the 
effect  of  a  cause.  Now,  where  is  that  cause?  What  is  that  cause?  But, 
if  it  comes  to  that,  the  right  of  free  speech,  the  right  of  free  press,  the 
right  of  peaceable  assemblage,  and  the  right  of  self-defense  is  denied  to  the 
workingman;  if  that  is  going  to  be  denied  us  by  the  courts  of  law,  what 
is  going  to  be  the  result?  Why,  the  workingmen  will  immediately  say 
as  a  matter  of  necessity,  "Why,  of  what  use  to  us  is  the  law?  What  is  the 
constitution  for?  Of  what  value  is  it  to  us?  It  certainly  must  belong  to 
somebody.  Yes,  it  is  used  .for  somebody  else's  benefit  and  protection,  not 
surely  for  ours."  This  will  be  the  natural  conclusion,  inevitably. 

There  was  no  evidence  produced  to  implicate  me  with  the  Haymarket 


86  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

which  does  not  exist  in  the  United  States  alone,  but  in  which  this  gov- 
ernment is  an  active  agent — a  conspiracy  for  the  purpose  of  increasing  the 
value  of  the  dollar  and  of  decreasing  the  value  of  man's  production  every- 
where in  the  world."  "It  is  a  conspiracy,  as  Mr.  Teller  said,  for  those  who 
have  power  to  take  advantage  of,  and  perpetuate  the  outrage  and  the 
wrong  upon  those  who  are  helpless  and  powerless."  Mr.  Vest,  in  the  dis- 
cussion upon  the  floor  of  the  senate,  used  these  words.  He  said  he  also 
preferred  the  house  resolutions.  He  said  that  the  question  was  one  between 
gold  and  silver,  between  gold  and  greenbacks;  between  the  man  who  wanted 
to  make  money  dear  and  the  man  who  borrowed  the  money;  and  unless 
this  trouble  was  terminated  on  equitable  and  fair  grounds  it  would  result 
in  a  sectional  struggle  between  the  east  and  the  west.  That  was  the  plain 
meaning  of  the  whole  thing.  It  was  a  conspiracy !  Senator  Jones,  of 
Nevada,  discussing  the  same  thing,  said  that  his  belief  was  "that  the 
shrinking  volumes  of  money  had  inflicted  more  evil,  more  suffering,  more 
penalties  upon  the  American  people  than  they  had  ever  suffered  from 
war,  pestilence,  or  famine.  What  the  people  want  is  money;  not  gold  nor 
silver,  but  dollars  and  what  liquidates  the  debt  and  keeps  the  red  flag  of 
the  sheriff  away  from  the  window."  Your  honor  will  observe  he  did  not 
refer  to  the  red  flag  of  the  commune  in  that  particular.  Now,  to  the  mind 
of  this  United  States  senator,  the  only  red  flag  that  is  dangerous  in  the 
United  States  is  the  sheriff's — the  flag  of  the  auctioneer,  denoting  the  death 
of  what?  Denoting  the  financial  demise  o'f  some  business  man  who  has  been 
destroyed  by  these  conspiracies  spoken  of  by  Senator  Vest,  Senator  Teller, 
and  Senator  Jones,  of  the  United  States  senate.  These  organized,  legalized 
conspiracies  that  are  bringing  about  wholesale  bankruptcies ;  conspiracies  that 
inflate  the  railway  stock  of  the  country  from  two  billion  dollars  to  six  bil- 
lion dollars ;  which  compel  the  people  of  this  country  to  pay  interest  upon 
four  billion  dollars  of  watered  stock  upon  railroads  alone,  compelling  the 
workingmen  of  America  to  pay  in  wages  for  this  inflation,  for  labor  in  the 
end  must  foot  the  bill.  Now,  these  men  urge  this  is  a  conspiracy.  So  do 
I,  and  so  do  the  vrorkingmen  of  this  country.  We  agree  with  them.  Now, 
this  is  a  part  of  the  programme  culminating  here  in  this  Haymarket  affair 
on  the  4th  of  May  last.  This  deplorable  conspiracy  to  which  I  referred 
incidentally  before,  and  which  I  now  wish  to  give  to  the  court  in  detail,  to 
break  down  the  eight  hour  movement  and  avenge  itself  upon  the  leaders 
of  the  labor  movement,  furnishes  indisputable  proof  that  we,  the  eight  hour 
men,  here  at  this  bar,  are  the  victims  of  that  foul  conspiracy  to  rob  and 
enslave  the  American  people. 

What  are  the  real  facts  of  that  Haymarket  tragedy?  Mayor  Harrison, 
of  Chicago,  has  caused  to  be  published  his  opinion,  because,  mark  you,  this 
is  all  a  matter  of  conjecture.  They  have  only  assumed  that  some  one  of 
these  men  threw  the  bomb.  It  is  only  an  inference  that  any  of  us  had 
anything  to  do  with  it.  It  is  not  a  fact,  and  it  is  not  proven.  It  is  merely 
an  opinion.  Your  honor  admits  that  we  did  not  perpetrate  the  deed,  or 
know  who  did  it,  but  that  we,  by  our  speeches,  instigated  some  one  else  to 
do  so.  Now,  let  us  see  the  other  side  of  this  case.  Mayor  Harrison  of 
Chicago,  has  caused  to  be  published  in  the  New  York  World,  and  which 
was  copied  in  the  Tribune  of  this  city,  this  statement:  "I  do  not  believe 
there  was  any  intention  on  the  part  of  Spies  and  those  men  to  have  bombs 
thrown  at  the  Haymarket.  If  so,  why  was  there  but  one  thrown?  It  was 
just  as  easy  for  them  to  throw  a  dozen  or  fifty,  and  to  throw  them  in  all 
parts  of  the  city,  as  it  was  to  have  thrown  one.  And  again,  if  it  was  in- 
tended to  throw  bombs  that  night,  the  leaders  would  not  have  been  there 
at  all,  in  my  opinion.  Like  commanders  in  chief,  they  would  have  been  in 
a  safe  place.  No,  it  cannot  be  shown  that  there  was  any  intention  on  the 
part  of  these  individuals  to  kill  that  particular  man  who  was  killed  at  that 
Haymarket  meeting."  Now,  your  honor,  this  is  the  mayor  of  Chicago.  He 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  87 

is  a  sensible  man.  He  is  in  a  position  to  know  what  he  is  talking  about. 
He  has  first-rate  opportunities  to  form  an  intelligent  opinion,  and  his 
opinion  is  worthy  of  respect.  He  knows  more  about  this  thing  than  the 
jury  that  sat  in  this  room,  for  he  knows — I  suspect  that  the  mayor  knows — 
of  some  of  the  methods  by  which  most  of  this  so-called  evidence  and  testi- 
mony was  manufactured.  I  don't  charge  it,  but  possibly  he  has  had  some 
intimation  of  it,  and  if  he  has  he  knows  more  about  this  case  and  the 
merits  of  this  case  than  did  the  jury  who  sat  here.  There  is  too  much  at 
stake  to  lake  anything  for  granted.  Your  honor  can't  afford  to  do  that. 

Is  it  nothing  to  destroy  the  lives  of  seven  men?  Are  the  rights  of  the 
poor  of  no  consequence?  Is  it  nothing,  that  we  should  regard  it  so  lightly, 
as  a  mere  pastime?  That  is  why  I  stand  here  at  such  length  to  present 
this  case  to  you,  that  you  may  understand  it;  that  you  may  have  our  side 
of  this  question  as  well  as  that  of  the  prosecution.  Now,  this  opinion  of 
Mayor  Harrison  was  based  upon  his  personal  observation  on  the  ground  at 
the  Haymarket  meeting.  Mark  you,  he  was  there,  and  this  is  his  opinion, 
both  as  to  the  character  of  the  speeches  and  the  deportment  both  of  the 
speakers  and  of  the  audience,  on  the  night  of  the  4th  of  May,  in  which  opinion 
Inspector  Bonfield  himself  concurred  with  the  mayor:  that  it  was  a  peace- 
able meeting,  calling  for  no  interference  to  within  ten  minutes  of  the  un- 
lawful order  to  disperse  the  same  by  the  guardians  of  the  peace  and  the 
preservers  of  order.  Now,  the  two  witnesses  for  the  prosecution,  who  are 
they?  Waller  and  Schroeder.  Those  were  the  State's  informers,  called 
"squealers,"  upon  whom  the  State  attempted  to  base  the  proof  and  charged 
the  conspiracy  against  us.  Have  they  made  out  a  case  on  the  testimony 
of  these  men?  Let  us  take  the  evidence  for  a  moment.  These  men  were 
the  first  witnesses  called,  and  they  absolutely  and  completely  negative  the 
idea,  and  not  alone  the  idea,  but  the  fact  itself,  that  the  collision  of  the 
Haymarket  was  ever  contemplated  at  that  meeting,  much  less  provided  for 
by  any  perpetrator  whatever.  Now,  that  stands  as  a  fact  in  the  testimony 
here.  It  was  not  brought  about  by  any  person  or  by  any  individual,  or  by 
any  member  of  the  so-called  armed  group,  and  your  honor  won't  claim 
that  we  have  not  a  right  to  have  an  armed  group.  Your  honor  will  not 
say  it  is  unlawful  to  have  an  armed  group  if  we  want  it.  As  I  under- 
stand the  law  and  the  constitution,  if  we  want  an  organized  group  we 
have  the  right  to  it.  The  constitution  defines  that  treason  against  the  gov- 
ernment consists  in  the  fact,  only  in  the  fact,  of  an  overt  act  proven,  indis- 
putably proven,  by  at  least  two  persons.  This  is  what  I,  as  an  American, 
understood  the  constitution  to  mean.  You  say  in  your  remarks  upon  the 
sentence  that  there  can  be  no  doubt  but  what  this  was  an  unlawful  com- 
bination. Well,  suppose  it  was.  If  I  am  a  member  of  an  unlawful  com- 
bination, am  I  to  be  hung  for  that?  Are  seven  men  to  be  exterminated 
for  that?  Are  there  not  surely  some  degrees  in  punishment?  Because  I 
belong  to  an  unlawful  combination  am  I  to  be  put  to  death?  Why,  that 
would  be  cruel.  That  would  be  a  verdict  of  hate.  That  would  be  a  penalty 
of  vengeance,  not  of  justice,  and  it  is  not  proven;  it  has  not  been  alleged, 
even,  nor  has  it  been  shown,  that  I  was  a  member  of  an  unlawful  com- 
bination. That  question  has  not  been  put  in  consideration  in  this  court;  it 
has  not  been  here  to  be  established  by  this  jury  whether  or  not  I  am  now 
or  ever  was  a  member  of  an  unlawful  combination.  Now,  for  proof  of  the 
charge  to  which  I  wish  to  call  your  honor's  attention,  that  there  was  no 
conspiracy,  and  given  out  of  the  mouths  of  these  witnesses  of  the  State, 
I  will  cite  the  very  words  of  the  witness  Waller  himself.  In  reply  to  in- 
terrogatories by  the  State's  attorney  as  to  what  was  said  at  the  meeting 
after  he  had  called  it  to  order,  Waller  said,  "It  was  said  that  these  men 
had  been  killed  at  McCormick's,"  referring  to  the  strikers  killed  by  the 
police  the  day  before. 

Engel  brought  forward  a  resolution  at  the  April  meeting,  and  what  did 


88          ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

Engel  say?  He  said  that  if  through  the  fall  of  the  strikers  the  other  men 
should  come  into  conflict  with  the  police,  we  should  aid  them.  He  then 
told  us  that  the  northwestern  group  had  resolved  to  bring  aid  to  these  men ; 
that  if,  on  account  of  this  work,  something  should  happen  to  the  police,  we 
must  assemble  at  the  corners.  What  else  did  Engel  say?  He  said  that  if 
tumults  occurred  in  the  city,  then  we  should  meet  in  Wicker  Park;  if  the 
word  should  appear  in  the  paper,  that  the  northwestern  group  and  the  Lehr- 
und  Wehr-Verein  should  assemble  in  the  park  with  arms.  After  Engel  said 
this,  a  committee  was  appointed  to  watch  the  movements  in  the  city  and 
report  to  us  if  a  riot  should  occur. 

Now  then,  take  into  consideration  this  language.  Just  consider  the  situ- 
ation. Look  at  the  attitude  of  these  capitalist  papers  for  years  toward  the 
workingmen;  and  not  only  that,  but  the  actual  use  of  these  armed  hirelings 
at  East  St.  Louis,  at  Saginaw,  at  Pittsburg,  all  over  the  country,  and  at 
McCormick's  the  day  before.  Look  at  the  condition  of  affairs,  and  I  ask 
you  if  these  men  were  not  justified  in  making  some  preparation  by  which 
they  could  defend  themselves,  because  there  is  no  proposition  here  to  assault 
anybody.  There  is  no  proposition  here  to  make  war  upon  anybody,  either 
their  persons  or  their  property: 

Q.  "Now,  was  anything  said  about  having  a  meeting  of  workingmen 
the  next  day?" 

A.  "Yes,  sir;  I  proposed  that  a  meeting  should  be  held  the  next  after- 
noon, but  that  was  rejected.  It  was  decided  to  have  a  meeting  in  the  even- 
ing, as  more  could  come  then." 

Q.     "Who  proposed  calling  a  meeting  in  the  evening?" 

A.  "Fischer.  He  proposed  having  one  at  the  Haymarket  and  it  was 
finally  resolved  to  call  one  at  8  o'clock." 

Q.    "Was  anything  said  as  to  what  should  be  done  at  that  meeting?" 

A.  '''It  was  intended  to  cheer  up  the  workmen  so  that  if  anything 
should  happen  they  should  be  prepared  for  a  conflict.  It  was  decided  to  call 
this  meeting  by  means  of  hand  bills.  The  getting  up  of  this  was  intrusted 
to  Fischer,  but  he  did  not  say  where  they  should  be  printed.  It  was  decided 
that  as  a  body  we  should  not  participate  in  the  Haymarket  meeting,  but 
should  meet  at  halls.  While  only  a  committee  should  be  at  the  Haymarket, 
if  the  committee  reported  that  something  happened,  we  should  attack  the 
police  where  it  was  arranged  for  each  group  to  do  so;  if  necessary,  in  addi- 
tion to  the  police,  we  would  attack  the  militia  and  fire  department." 

Now,  then,  in  the  first  part  of  this  it  says  that  in  the  case  of  the  police 
coming  upon  the  strikers,  shooting  the  strikers  down,  destroying  them,  inter- 
fering with  the  people,  interfering  unlawfully,  interfering  with  the  right  of 
the  people  to  assemble,  interfering  with  the  right  of  the  people  to  express 
their  views,  mark  you,  it  was  said  in  such  a  contingency  they  would  defend 
themselves.  Now,  these  men  here  upon  the  stand,  Schroeder  and  Waller 
who  were  giving  the  testimony,  used  the  word  "attack."  When  it  was 
translated  "attack,"  you  must  not  take  that  as  a  literal  meaning  of  these 
men  It  was  defense.  They  meant  by  this  word  defense.  If  it  had  been 
literally  translated  as  these  men  meant  it,  and  as  the  spirit  of  the  testimony 
shows-,  the  word  would  not  have  been  "attack,"  but  would  have  been  de- 
fense. In  every  instance  the  whole  preparation  and  proof  about  it  shows 
that  it  was  for  defense.  What  could  they  attack?  What  can  a  handful  of 
men  attack?  There  was  only  a  handful  of  men  there  at  best.  What  can 
they  attack?  Who  can  they  attack?  What  could  they  capture?  What 
could  they  take?  Wouldn't  it  be  ridiculous  for  them  to  undertake  to  attack 
the  city  of  Chicago,  to  attack  the  authorities,  to  undertake  to  seize  the  city? 
Why,  that  would  be  nonsense.  It  would  be  ridiculous.  Upon  the  very  face 
of  it,  it  is  an  absurdity.  It  was  for  defense.  They  said  that  it  was  for 
defense,  and  for  no  other  purpose,  in  the  event  that  the  police  invaded  the 
meetings  of  workingmen  and  unlawfully — as  Judge  McAllister  had  told  the 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  89 

workingmen  of  the  city,  that  the  police  of  Chicago  could  not  unlawfully 
invade  their  meetings,  and  break  them  up — Judge  McAllister  had  told  us 
this  in  his  decision.  We  believed  that  that  was  what  the  law  was.  We  be- 
lieved that  we  had  the  constitutional  right  to  assemble.  Now,  why  shouldn't 
we  protect  ourselves  in  such  a  contingency? 

In  this  connection  right  here  [Judge  Gary  indicated  his  impatience]  — 
Please,  bear  with  me  for  a  few  minutes.  In  1877 — to  show  you  what  the 
police  will  do,  and  what  they  will  do  unlawfully — they  broke  down  the 
doors ;  they  entered  the  hall  at  West  Twelfth  street  Turner  Hall,  where  the 
Furniture  Workers'  Union  was  in  session  considering  the  eight  hour  move- 
ment just  as  we  were  at  the  Haymarket  that  night,  and  the  question  of 
wages.  They  broke  into  that  hall.  They  drove  the  people  out  with  club 
and  pistol,  and  fired  among  them,  and  they  killed  one  of  the  people  in  that 
hall,  and  Judge  McAllister,  upon  the  trial  afterward  declared  that  that  was 
an  outrageous  assault,  that  it  was  cruel,  bloody  murder,  and  that  if  every 
single  policeman — and  there  were  about  twenty-five  or  thirty  who  went  into 
that  establishment — Judge  McAllister  said  that  if  every  policeman,  if  every 
single  one  of  them  had  been  killed  on  the  spot,  no  one  could  have  been 
harmed  for  doing  it.  This  was  the  decision  of  the  judge;  that  has  stood 
as  the  law.  These  things  had  been  done  in  Chicago.  The  police  swept 
do\vn  through  the  lumber  yards  at  McCormick's  the  day  before.  Those 
things  were  done  all  over  the  country  and  through  the  city  to  put  down 
strikes  everywhere.  Now,  where  is  the  crime  in  our  having  said  that  we 
would,  if  no  other  remedy  or  redress  was  left  us,  that  we  would  follow  the 
law  laid  down  by  Judge  McAllister  and  use  our  right,  our  constitutional 
right,  our  legal  right  to  defend  ourselves? 

Well,  now,  mark  you,  this  Schroeder  and  this  Waller  were  witnesses 
for  the  State;  they  were  what  is  called  "squealers,"  and  they  were  men — 
now,  don't  forget  this  point — these  men  were  telling  their  story  under  a 
great  bribe.  What  was  that  bribe?  Liberty  and  life,  two  of  the  greatest 
and  sweetest  things  known  to  man.  Life  and  liberty  were  offered  to 
Schroeder  and  Waller.  Was  it  from  the  fact  that  they  were  given  money, 
as  was  testified  to  by  both  of  them,  and  uncontradicted  by  the  prosecution? 
Aside  from  that  fact,  ITfe  and  liberty  were  given  to  these  men  if  they  would 
tell  a  story  that  would  fit  a  theory  and  carry  out  a  certain  line  of  the  prose- 
cution to  bring  about  a  certain  verdict.  They  gave  that  kind  of  testimony. 
You  will  remember  that  Seliger's  wife  upon  the  stand  testified  that  these 
men  were  kept  by  Captain  Schaack  in  the  station,  under  durance  vile,  and 
herself  also,  until  both  Seliger  and  Waller  were  compelled,  under  intimi- 
dation, to  sign  four  different  statements  in  writing;  that  is  an  uncontradict- 
able  statement.  Consider  the  condition  under  which  these  men  gave  this 
testimony,  and  even  with  all  that,  they  only  testify  that  the  meeting  was 
for  the  purpose  of  defense,  and  not  for  any  action  at  the  Haymarket  meet- 
ing, and  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  Haymarket  meeting,  had  no  connection 
with  the  Haymarket  meeting.  This  is  the  statement  of  the  witnesses  for 
the  State  on  the  part  of  the  conspirators,  so-called.  On  cross-examination 
the  question  was  asked :  "Well,  didn't  Engel  say  in  reference  to  the  plan 
of  action  agreed  upon  by  the  armed  group  on  Monday  night  and  on  Sunday 
that  it  was  to  be  carried  out  in  case  the  police  should  interfere  with  your 
right  of  free  speech  and  free  assemblage?"  "Tf  the  police  should  attack 
us,  yes." 

That  this  plan  was  to  be  followed  only  when  the  police  would — I  believe 
Captain  Black  asked  this  question — "would  by  brutal  force  interfere  with 
your  right  of  free  assemblage  and  free  speech?" 

A.  "It  was  said  that  we  would  use  or  resort  to  this  plan  or  the  execu- 
tion of  it  whenever  the  police  should  attack  us." 

Now  listen  to  that,  your  honor.  Up  here,  you  understand,  in  one  part 
of  this  testimony  it  is  said  we  got  ready  to  attack  the  police,  and  down  here 


90  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

on  the  cross-examination  it  shows  that  the  witness  himself  meant  that  we 
should  defend  ourselves — not  attack  the  police.  It  was  an  absurdity — per- 
fectly absurd — to  talk  about  a  handful  of  men  attacking  the  authorities  of 
this  city.  What,  if  they  got  the  city  of  Chicago,  wouldn't  it  be  a  white 
elephant?  What,  in  the  name  of  common  sense,  could  they  do  with  it?  It 
reminds  me  of  some  people  who  are  afraid  that  if  the  world  should  be  made 
free  and  the  workingmen  should  come  into  their  liberty  that  they  would 
steal  the  world  and  run  oft  with  it.  What  would  they  do  with  it  if  they 
did?  It  is  an  absurd  proposition.  Now,  the  statement  of  these  men  under 
cross-examination  shows  what  their  intention  was,  and  they  used  the  word 
"defense,"  whereas,  in  the  direct  examination,  and  by  the  translation  of  the 
district  attorney,  they  are  made  in  English  to  use  the  word  "attack" : 

Q.  "You  say  that  nothing  was  said  at  the  Monday  night  meeting  with 
reference  io  any  action  to  be  taken  by  you  at  the  Haymarket?" 

A.  "We  said  we  would  do  nothing  there;  we  were  not  to  do  anything 
at  the  Haymarket." 

Q.    "Was  it  not  the  plan  that  you  should  not  be  there  at  all?" 

A.    "Yes,  sir." 

These  are  the  State's  witnesses  upon  which  they  propose  to  show  and 
prove  a  conspiracy  against  us,  your  honor. 

Q.  "And  you  also  say  that  you  did  not  anticipate  that  the  policemen 
would  come  to  the  Haymarket?" 

A.    "No,  we  did  not  think  the  police  would  come  to  the  Haymarket." 

Q.  "For  this  reason  no  preparations  were  made  for  meeting  any  police 
attack  on  the  Haymarket  square?" 

A.    "Not  by  them." 

Q.  "Was  it  not  the  sole  purpose  of  the  meeting  at  the  Haymarket  to 
protest  against  the  action  of  the  police  in  the  shooting  of  the  workingmen 
at  McCormick's  factory?'' 

A.    "Yes,  sir." 

This  was  the  testimony  of  the  State's  witness,  Waller. 

Mr.  Schroeder,  another  witness  upon  whom  the  State  rested  to  prove 
there  was  a  concerted  plot  to  entrap  and  destroy  the  police,  swore:  "Lingg 
was  not  present.  We  talked  about  the  condition  of  the  workingmen,  and 
the  remark  was  made  that  the  members  of  the  northwestern  group  should 
go  to  Wicker  Park  in  case  the  police  should  make  an  attack  on  them" — you 
understand,  your  honor,  police  can  make  attacks.  Judge  McAllister  says 
they  can  make  unlawful  and  unconstitutional  attacks.  Now,  shall  it  be 
held  by  you  that  the  police,  like  the  kings  of  old,  can  do  no  wrong,  because 
forsooth,  there  happens  Io  be  here  upon  this  trial  eight  poor  men,  eight 
workingmen,  eight  men  without  money  or  friends?  Are  we  to  be  offered 
up  and  immolated  as  a  sacrifice  upon  the  altar  of  Mammon  to  satisfy  the 
vindictive  hatred  and  greed  of  the  monopolists  of  this  city?  For  that  is 
the  sum  total  of  what  it  amounts  to,  your  honor. 

Q.  "How  should  they  defend  themselves?  Was  anything  said  about 
dynamite?" 

A.     "No;  as  well  as  anyone  could,  if  anyone  had  anything  with  him." 

Q.  "How  long  were  you  at  Greif's  Hall  on  that  Monday  night  pre- 
vious to  the  Haymarket  meeting?"  (This  is  Schroeder.) 

A.    "Three  quarters  of  an  hour." 

Q.    "What  was  discussed  there?" 

A.  "If  the  police  made  an  attack  upon  the  workmen" — now,  your 
honor,  keep  this  in  mind ;  the  prosecution  has  tried  to  make  out  that  there 
was  a  meeting  held ;  that  there  was  a  conspiracy  entered  into,  and  that  it 
was  resolved  upon  to  attack  the  police.  Their  own  witnesses  here,  their 
own  testimony,  shows  that  there  was  nothing  of  the  kind  intended — "if  the 
police  made  an  attack  upon  the  workmen  they  would  help  the  workmen 
to  help  themselves." 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  91 

Q.    "Was  anything  said  about  bombs?" 

A.    "No." 

Q.    "At  any  of  the  meetings?" 

A.    "No;  not  while  I  was  present." 

Q.  "Well,  while  you  were  present  at  the  Monday  night  meeting  they 
talked  about  how  they  would  help  the  workmen  defend  themselves?" 

A.    "Yes,  sir." 

Q.  "And  nothing  was  said  about  throwing  bombs  on  Monday  night, 
or  at  any  other  time?" 

A.    "No." 

Q.  "Was  it  not  talked  about  throwing  bombs  at  the  Haymarket  meet- 
ing?" 

A.    "No;  not  while  I  was  there." 

Q.  "Then  it  was  talked  about  throwing  dynamite  to  destroy  the  police 
at  the  next  meeting  at  the  Haymarket?" 

A.    "There  was  nothing  said  about  it  while  I  was  there." 

Q.    "You  went  to  the  Haymarket  meeting?" 

A.    "Yes,  sir;  I  was  in  a  saloon  when  the  bomb  exploded." 

Q     "Did  you  go  there  with  any  dynamite  in  your  pocket?" 

A.    "I  don't  know  what  dynamite  is ;  don't  know  dynamite." 

Q.    "Did  you  know  there  would  be  trouble  at  that  meeting?" 

A.  "Well,  I  know  that  much,  that  when  the  police  should  attack  th«j 
workingmen  that  each  one  should  help  themselves  as  best  they  could." 

Q.  "At  the  time  you  left  the  meeting,  the  meeting  was  quiet  and 
peaceable?" 

A.    "Yes" 

And  this  is  the  testimony,  your  honor,  which  was  relied  upon  to  prove  a 
conspiracy  on  my  part.  Now,  I  did  not  belong  to  this  meeting;  I  did  not 
know  that  there  was  such  a  meeting.  In  fact,  I  was  not  in  Chicago.  I  was 
in  Ohio  and  the  meeting  was  conducted  in  German;  I  cannot  speak  German; 
I  do  not  understand  it.  I  never  saw  Schroeder  or  Waller  in  my  life  until 
1  saw  them  on  the  witness  stand  here.  Lingg,  the  first  time  I  ever  saw 
him  in  my  life  was  when  I  came  into  this  court  room  and  surrendered  for 
trial,  and  saw  him  sitting  in  the  prisoner's  box.  Why,  your  honor,  it  is 
ridiculous.  It  is  an  absurdity;  it  is  a  misconception  of  the  whole  situation 
and  conjunction  of  circumstances  in  connection  with  this  whole  affair 
when  I  was  away  from  the  city,  and  this  is  a  sentence  passed  upon  me 
for  being  connected  with  a  conspiracy  which,  the  prosecution  claims,  was 
organized  for  the  purpose  and  resulted  in  the  death  of  Mathias  Degan  at 
the  Haymarket  square  on  the  4th  of  May. 

Referring  again  to  the  informer  Waller's  testimony;  the  State's  attor- 
ney is  reported  by  the  Herald  of  July  17  as  saying  after  the  adjournment : 
"This  man's  testimony  is  going  to  convict  the  prisoners ;"  that  is,  Waller. 
How  preposterous !  The  two  informers  disclosed  no  fact  that  bore  the 
semblance  of  a  conspiracy,  which  in  law  is  an  agreement  to  do  a  criminal 
act.  Now,  I  was  not  there.  I  did  not  know  anything  about  it.  I  do  not 
speak  German.  I  do  not  know  these  men.  I  never  saw  them  before.  I 
don't  know  who  the  men  were  at  the  meeting.  The  only  man  that  I  know 
that  is  connected  with  this  matter,  I  believe,  is  Engel ;  him  I  have  met 
before,  I  don't  know  whether  he  was  at  the  meeting  or  not.  I  did  not  know 
there  was  such  a  meeting.  I  never  requested  it  to  be  called.  Now,  the 
State's  attorney  says  that  this  man's  testimony  is  the  thread  upon  which 
he  proposed  to  connect  me  with  this  conspiracy  to  do  an  unlawful  thing, 
which  resulted  in  the  death  of  Mathias  Degan  at  the  Haymarket  on  the  4th 
of  May.  How  preposterous!  These  informers  disclose  no  fact  that  bears 
the  semblance  of  a  conspiracy,  but  on  the  contrary,  their  testimony  simply 
revealed  a  noble  and  a  fraternal  and  a  patriotic  purpose ;  that — quoting  the 
language  of  Schroeder  himself — "if  the  police  made  an  attack  upon  the 


92          ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

workingmen  unlawfully  again,  they  would  help  the  vrorkingmen  to  resist 
it,  or  to  defend  themselves.''  Waller  testified  in  chief,  and  reiterated  it 
in  cross-examination,  that  Elngel  and  Fischer,  these  noble  and  brave  Ger- 
mans, offered  a  resolution  at  Greif's  Hall,  on  the  announcement  that  six 
men  had  been  wantonly  and  brutally  murdered  by  the  police  at  McCor- 
mick's  that  if  other  men  should  come  into  encounter  with  the  police  we 
should  aid  them,  and  further  swore  that  this  plan  was  to  be  followed  only 
when  the  police,  by  brutal  force,  should  interfere  with  the  workman's  right 
of  free  assemblage  and  free  speech. 

Now,  then,  where  is  the  foul  and  dastardly  criminal  conspiracy  here? 
Where  it  is?  So  preposterous  was  it  on  its  face  to  call  such  a  noble  com- 
pact to  do  a  lawful  thing  a  conspiracy,  that  it  became  necessary,  in  the  face 
of  a  dozen  witnesses,  both  for  the  prosecution  and  the  defense,  to  swear 
that  the  bomb  came  from  the  pavement  on  Desplaines  street,  south  of  the 
alley,  between  the  alley  and  Randolph  street,  a  statement  made  by  Bonfield 
himself  to  reporters  about  half  an  hour  after  the  tragedy  occurred,  and 
published  in  the  Times  on  May  5,  the  following  morning — Louis  Haas,  Bon- 
field's  special  detective  on  the  ground,  at  the  coroner's  inquest,  swore  the 
bomb  was  thrown  from  the  east  side  of  Desplaines  street  and  about  fifteen 
feet,  he  believed,  south  of  the  alley,  a  statement  confirmed  by  the  witness 
Burnett,  for  the  defense,  who  located  it  fifteen  feet  even  further  south  than 
Haas  or  Bonfield  did — still,  on  the  impeached  testimony  of  Gilmer,  who 
swore  the  bomb  was  thrown  from  within  the  alley,  we  are  convicted  because 
he  was  also  willing  to  perjure  himself  by  swearing  that  Spies  lit  the  fuse 
of  the  fatal  missile.  The  idea  of  a  man  striking  a  match  in  an  alley  to  light 
a  bomb  in  the  midst  of  a  crowd,  the  people  and  police  standing  all  around 
him !  It  seems  to  me  that  such  a  statement  as  that  ought  to,  among  sensible 
men,  on  the  face  of  it,  carry  its  own  refutation.  Perfectly  absurd !  If 
this  statement  bore  the  semblance  of  truth  with  regard  to  Gilmer,  or  was 
the  truth,  not  one  of  these  defendants  would  shrink  from  the  responsibility 
of  the  right  of  self-defense,  your  honor,  and  of  free  speech,  and  the  right 
of  the  people  peaceably  to  assemble.  It  is  because  this  is  not  the  work  of 
the  Anarchists  or  of  the  workingmen,  that  we  repel  the  charge,  which 
proves  there  was  no  concerted  action,  and  that  it  was  none  of  the  plans  of 
these  groups.  It  is  not  unlawful  to  repel  an  invasion  of  our  meetings. 
In  the  case  of  the  People  vs.  Miller  the  learned  judge  McAllister  expounded 
the  law  of  Illinois  under  which  the  people  had  the  right  to  assemble  at  the 
Haymarket.  He  said  they  were  entitled  to  be  as  free  from  molestation  as 
in  our  castle  and  our  homes.  We  were  not  obstructing  the  traffic  on  the 
highway.  As  there  is  no  travel  thereon  at  night  there  was  and  can  be  no 
pretense  on  that  score,  because  the  mayor  of  the  city  of  Chicago  was  pres- 
ent and  did  not  interfere,  and,  in  fact,  directed  the  inspector  of  police, 
after  10  o'clock,  that  there  was  no  occasion  for  police  interference.  He, 
therefore,  as  the  sole  judge,  under  the  law,  recognized  that  assemblage  not 
only  as  a  lawful  assemblage,  but  more,  a  peaceful  assemblage,  within  the 
law  and  the  constitution  of  both  the  State  and  the  Federal  government,  and 
entitled  to  the  protection  of  both,  which  we  have  here  and  now  claimed 
in  vain,  as  this  court  refuses  in  this  instance,  or  has  up  to  this  time,  to  en- 
force the  right  of  the  people.  For  these  reasons  I  ask  the  suspension  of 
your  sentence,  for  the  reasons  that  have  been  stated  here ;  that  there  was 
no  conspiracy,  that  it  was  an  organization  for  defense;  that  the  meeting 
was  peaceable;  that  it  was  a  lawful  meeting,  as  the  mayor  of  the  city  of 
Chicago  declared  it  upon  the  stand  to  be,  and  as  Bonfield  and  Haas  both 
said,  the  morning  after  the  Haymarket  tragedy,  that  the  bomb  did  not  come 
from  the  alley,  but  south  of  it.  I  ask  your  honor  to  suspend  your  judg- 
ment and  give  us  innocent  men  a  chance,  in  a  new  trial,  to  prove  these 
facts  beyond  any  question.  The  meeting,  your  honor,  was  sacred  from 
intrusion  or  trespass — as  sacred  as  a  man's  home,  which  is  his  castle ;  even 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  93 

more,  for  an  assemblage  of  the  people  is  the  primary  seat  of  action  on  their 
part,  of  all  authority  on  their  part  in  a  republic,  and  is  guarded  by  the  first 
amendment  to  the  constitution  of  the  United  States  from  any  abridgement, 
as  it  is  also  by  the  constitution  of  the  State  of  Illinois,  now  violated  by  this 
unconstitutional  verdict.  You  have  read  the  decision  of  Judge  McAllister 
in  this  case ;  I  have  it  here.  It  would  consume  time  before  this  court  to  read 
it,  and  I  will  just  submit  it.  Your  honor  has  read  it,  of  course,  and  I  will 
not  take  up  your  time  with  the  reading  of  it.  I  offer  it,  however,  as  a  part 
of  the  statement  that  I  wish  to  make  in  connection  with  our  view  of  our 
defense,  and  our  appeal  to  you  for  a  new  trial  in  this  case. 

Now,  then,  I  want  to  call  your  attention  to  what  I  regard  as  the  origin 
of  this  bomb  at  the  Haymarket.  I  believe  it  was  instigated  by  eastern 
monopolists  to  produce  public  sentiment  against  popular  movements,  espe- 
cially the  eight-hour  movement  then  pending,  and  that  some  of  the  Pinker- 
tons  were  their  tools  to  execute  the  plan.  To  sustain  this  accusation  I 
submit  to  you  the  following  facts :  Just  exactly  four  days  before  the  grand 
strike  for  eight  hours  throughout  the  United  States,  and  only  one  week 
before  the  Haymar'iet  tragedy,  the  New  York  Times,  one  of  the  leading 
organs  of  railroad,  bank,  coal,  telegraph  and  telephone  monopoly,  published 
the  following  notice,  under  date  of  April  25,  1886,  in  an  editorial  on  the 
condition  of  the  market  and  the  causes  of  the  existing  decline  and  the 
panicky  symptoms  which  existed.  The  New  York  Times  says :  "The  strike 
question  is,  of  course,  the  dominant  one,  and  is  disagreeable  in  a  variety  of 
ways.  A  short  and  easy  way  to  settle  it  is  urged  in  some  quarters,  which 
is  to  indict  for  conspiracy  every  man  who  strikes  and  summarily  lock  him 
up.  This  method  would  undoubtedly  strike  a  wholesome  terror  into  the 
hearts  of  the  working  classes.  Another  way  suggested  is  to  pick  out  the 
leaders  and  make  such  an  example  of  them  as  would  scare  others  into  sub- 
mission." This  was  the  25th  of  April,  an  editorial  in  the  New  York  Times, 
written  in  view  of  the  contemplated  strike  on  the  1st  of  May  for  eight 
hours.  The  New  York  Tribune,  now  no  longer  the  oracle  of  the  great 
American  tribune,  Horace  Greeley,  that  defender  of  oppressed  humanity,  but 
the  servile  organ  of  the  most  oppressive  forms  of  monopoly,  said  just  about 
this  time  in  an  editorial :  "The  best  policy  would  be  to  drive  workingmen 
into  open  mutiny  against  the  law."  The  New  York  Herald,  at  that  date 
suggested  by  its  contemporaries  to  make  examples  of  the  leaders  in  the 
short-hour  movement,  said :  "Two  hours  taken  from  ten  hours  of  labor 
throughout  the  United  States  by  the  proposed  short-hour  movement  would 
make  a  difference  annually  of  hundreds  of  millions  in  value,  both  to  the 
capital  invested  in  industries  and  to  existing  stock."  The  issue  of  the  hour, 
then,  with  the  New  York  and  Chicago  Stock  Exchanges  and  Board  of  Trade 
and  Produce  Exchanges  was  how  to  preserve  the  steadiness  of  the  market 
and  maintain  the  fictitious  values  then  and  there  rapidly  falling  under  the 
paralyzing  influence  of  the  simultaneous  eight-hour  demand  throughout  the 
United  States. 

Your  honor,  so  common  is  this  impression  among  people,  so  common  is 
this  belief  among  the  labor  organizations  and  workingmen  of  this  country, 
that  I  wish  to  impress  upon  you  the  view  which  I  present.  I  am  a  member 
of  the  Knights  of  Labor,  that  is  an  organization  of  nearly  a  million  Ameri- 
can workingmen.  I  am  a  member  of  my  union,  the  Printers'  Union,  and 
have  been  for  fourteen  years  in  the  city  of  Chicago.  This  is  a  national  and 
international  organization  with  some  sixty-odd  thousand  members  in  the 
United  States.  These  organizations  publish  a  great  many  newspapers  in 
America,  and  every  single  one  of  them  believes  that  that  bomb  at  the  Hay- 
market  was  instigated  by  the  monopolists  to  break  down  the  eight-hour 
movement.  Hear  our  side.  You  have  heard  the  Citizens'  Association's  side 
of  this  question,  you  have  heard  the  bankers'  side,  you  have  heard  the  rail- 
way magnates'  side,  you  have  heard  the  Board  of  Trade's  side;  I  ask  you 


94  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

now  to  listen  also  to  the  side  of  the  workers.  I  might  read  you  here  extract 
after  extract  from  these  papers  to  show  you  that  what  I  state  is  true.  I 
will  read  you  one  among  the  many  I  have.  The  Knights  of  Labor,  a  paper 
printed  in  the  city  of  Chicago  by  the  Knights  of  Labor,  says :  "It  would 
seem  that  Pinkerton's  Detective  Agency  has  contracted  to  carry  out  this  pol- 
icy, and  to  at  least  make  the  public  believe  that  workingmen  are  rebels 
against  the  law.  It  may  not  be  long  until  people  will  see  that  those  detective 
gangs,  instead  of  being  gangs  of  peace,  are  really  the  agencies  of  monopolists 
to  trump  up  charges  and  produce  public  sentiment  against  the  popular  move- 
ments of  the  people."  Now,  on  this  subject,  a  paper  printed  at  Marinette, 
Wis.,  the  Marinette  Eagle,  says :  "The  blowing  up  of  the  street  cars  in  St. 
Louis  by  dynamite  during  the  strike  there  last  summer  was  directly  traceable 
to  Pinkerton's  agents,  who  put  up  the  job.  Gould's  officials  once  tore  down  and 
destroyed  a  telegraph  pole,  and  the  satanic  press  made  but  a  feeble  remon- 
strance while  the  perpetrators  of  the  dastardly  act  were  never  prosecuted, 
and  yet  the  wage  earners  are  called  Anarchists."  As  I  said  before,  I  could 
quote  and  take  up  a  great  deal  of  time  in  quoting  and  reading  the  sentiments 
of  anti-monopoly,  greenback,  labor,  Knights  of  Labor,  Trade  Union  and 
Socialist  newspapers,  holding  the  monopolists  responsible  for  this  act  in  the 
United  States.  I  will  not  take  up  your  time,  but  I  will  call  your  attention 
in  this  connection  to  one  thing. 

In  the  strike  down  there  at  East  St.  Louis  last  summer,  where  the  rail- 
road companies  called  for  "men  of  grit,"  and  advertised  to  pay  men  of  grit 
"that  meant  business"  five  dollars  a  day,  they  got  a  lot  of  men,  and  these 
men  fired  upon  people  that  were  walking  along  peaceably  on  a  railroad  track 
in  East  St.  Louis,  and  killed  seven  men  and  one  woman.  Those  men  were 
in  the  pay  of  this  pool  of  railways.  The  grand  jury  of  St.  Louis  refused  to 
indict  those  men  even,  you  understand,  refused  even  to  indict  them ;  and  they 
were  sent  home  with  pay  and  honor.  But  here  in  Chicago  a  mass-meeting  of 
workingmen  occurs,  and  at  that  meeting  there  is  a  bomb  thrown ;  some  men 
are  killed.  The  deed  is  fastened  upon  the  men  who  spoke  at  that  meeting, 
and  they  are  made  responsible  for  it,  and  they  are  brought  in  here  and  rail- 
roaded through  in  double-quick  time  to  the  scaffold,  and,  your  honor,  will 
you  now  refuse  to  give  us  a  chance  to  have  this  matter  heard  fairly,  to  give 
us  a  chance  in  a  new  trial?  The  charge  made  by  the  labor  papers  that  the 
monopolists  were  at  the  bottom  of  the  Haymarket  tragedy,  and  that  the 
Pinkertons  were  employed  to  carry  it  out,  supplies  the  key  to  the  solution  of 
the  mystery  as  to  who  did  throw  that  bomb,  for  it  has  not  been  proven  upon 
one  of  these  defendants,  without  contradicting  the  history  of  that  night,  as 
given  by  Bonfield  to  the  Times  reporter,  and  also  by  Lieutenant  Haas,  Whit- 
ing, Allen,  the  reporter,  and  seven  witnesses,  all  told,  for  the  State,  and 
Burnett,  Taylor  and  Simonson,  and  a  number  of  witnesses  for  the  defense. 
It  rests  solely  upon  the  impeached,  unsupported,  the  perjured,  paid-for  testi- 
mony of  the  perjured  villain,  Gilmer.  That  is  all  the  thread  that  connects 
it.  Now,  who  will  believe  his  silly  story  that  one  of  these  men  or  myself  had 
any  knowledge  of  the  party  who  hurled  the  deadly  bomb  on  its  awful  mis- 
sion of  death?  It  rests  on  Gilmer's  testimony  alone. 

The  New  York  Times  of  April  27  urged  as  an  easy  way  to  settle  the 
eight-hour  movement  to  pick  out  the  leaders  and  make  such  an  example  of 
them  as  to  scare  the  others  into  submission.  The  wicked  cabal  of  monop- 
olists, with  an  organ  capable  of  making  such  an  utterance  and  giving  such 
atrocious  advice,  is  capable  of  putting  it  into  execution,  and  force  was  to  be 
used  if  blood  flowed  and  the  innocent  perished.  The  McCormick  difficulty 
of  the  day  before,  where  unarmed  working  people  were  attacked  by  the 
police,  transpired  within  five  days  of  this  threat  in  the  east.  Stocks  went 
down.  The  great  commercial  stock  centers  were  convulsed  with  apprehen- 
sions of  a  swift  decline  in  values  if  the  eight-hour  strike  succeeded.  The 
wheels  of  industry  remained  paralyzed  by  the  thousands  of  laborers  vrho 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  95 

were  out  making  the  strike  in  favor  of  the  eight-hour  movement.  Some- 
thing must  be  done  to  stop  this  movement,  and  it  was  felt  that  its  strongest 
impulse  was  at  the  west,  where  forty  thousand  men  were  on  a  strike  for 
eight  hours  in  the  city  of  Chicago,  and  in  order  to  make  such  an  example 
of  them — to  quote  the  language  of  the  Times — as  to  scare  the  others  into 
submission,  I  repeat,  that  the  men  in  New  York,  capable  of  making  such  a 
suggestion,  are  capable  of  carrying  it  out,  of  putting  it  into  execution.  Now, 
isn't  that  a  fair  presumption?  Was  it  not  worth  hundreds  of  millions  of 
dollars  to  them  annually  to  have  it  done?  Pinkerton's  agency,  in  my  opinion, 
contracted  to  carry  it  out;  they  have  done  such  things  on  previous  occasions. 
Often  before  have  they  done  such  things;  it  has  been  proven  on  them  in 
numerous  parallel  cases  of  conspiracy  to  bring  odium  upon  popular  move- 
ments in  all  parts  of  the  country,  and  I  read  to  you  that  official  circular  of 
Pinkerton's  offering  himself  to  monopolists  who  wanted  just  such  con- 
spirators and  schemes  as  were  laid  down  by  the  Herald  of  New  York,  and 
the  Times,  Tribune  and  other  papers.  The  Pinkertons,  in  their  circular  ad- 
dressed to  these  monopolists,  said  they  had  the  men  ready;  they  were  pre- 
pared to  furnish  the  information,  and  they  could  build  up  and  provide  a 
conspiracy  that  would  break  down  any  contemplated  effort  on  the  part  of  the 
men  to  receive  better  pay  or  an  improvement  in  their  condition.  That  is 
Pinkerton's  own  circular.  He  would  carry  out  that  which  he  proposes  to 
carry  out.  He  offers  himself  for  sale  to  do  that  kind  of  work;  he  openly 
declares  in  the  circular  that  that  is  his  business ;  that  he  makes  his  living  and 
his  money  by  that  occupation. 

Nor  are  we  wanting  in  the  clear  links  of  circumstantial  evidence  to  point 
to  the  culprits  who  will  yet  call  upon  the  rocks  to  hide  them  from  the  wrath 
of  an  outraged  people.  There  is  in  the  possession  of  this  court  in  this  case 
on  file  the  sworn  testimony  of  John  Philip  DeLuce  of  Indianapolis,  a  saloon 
keeper,  whose  story  was  printed  in  the  papers  at  the  time  he  first  made  it 
public,  in  May  of  this  year.  He  swears  that  at  7  o'clock  one  morning  in 
May,  this  year,  an  unknown  man  wearing  a  mustache,  dressed  in  dark 
clothes,  five  feet  five  or  five  feet  six  inches  in  height,  came  to  his  place,  and 
setting  a  small  satchel  on  the  bar,  asked  for  a  drink.  Taking  a  drink,  the 
customer  said  he  came  from  New  York,  was  on  his  way  to  Chicago,  and  the 
stranger  closed  with  the  remark  that  the  saloon  keeper  would  shortly  hear  of 
trouble  in  Chicago.  Pointing  to  his  satchel  he  said :  "I  have  got  some- 
thing in  there  that  will  work;  you  will  hear  of  it."  Turning  at  the  door  as 
he  departed,  he  held  up  his  satchel,  and,  pointing  at  it,  remarked:  "You 
will  hear  of  it  soon."  Shortly  after  this  episode  the  news  of  the  Haymarket 
tragedy  reached  DeLuce.  The  deponent  appeals  to  a  certain  Oscar  Smith  as 
a  witness  to  this  conversation,  and  Smith  follows  with  an  affidavit  to  the 
truth  of  this  statement;  that  was  away  back  in  May.  Now,  if  this  is  to  be 
a  case  of  conjecture,  if  this  is  to  be  a  case  of  opinion,  I  submit  if  that  man's 
testimony  is  not  as  worthy  of  the  consideration  of  this  court  as  is  the  testi- 
mony of  Harry  Gilmer.  Or,  if  your  honor  still  assumes  that  we  instigated 
some  one  else  to  hurl  the  bomb,  I  submit  if  the  threats  of  the  monopolist 
papers,  and  the  proposals  of  Pinkerton  to  carry  them  out,  do  not  show  that 
some  mercenary  in  their  employ  performed  the  deed  resulting  in  the  Hay- 
market  tragedy.  The  Pinkerton  force  advertises  to  carry  on  this  kind  of 
work.  Pinkerton  advertises  in  his  circular  that  he  is  ready  to  do  this  kind 
of  a  job.  The  New  York  Herald  and  New  York  Times  say  the  market  is 
going  down  in  consequence  of  the  contemplated  strike  on  the  first  of  May, 
and  say  that  the  leaders  must  be  arrested  and  thrust  into  prison,  and  thus 
terrify  the  others  into  submission  by  making  examples  of  the  leaders.  This  is 
what  the  Times  says ;  this  is  what  Pinkerton  says.  About  this  time  some 
one,  as  testified  to  by  two  reputable  witnesses,  stopped  at  Indianapolis ; 
that  was  in  May;  the  Haymarket  tragedy  was  the  fourth.  This  man  testifies 
to  that  fact.  A  stranger  stops  there.  He  says :  "I  am  going  to  Chicago.  I 


96          ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

have  something  that  will  work.  You  will  hear  from  it."  The  man  was  in 
his  cups,  no  doubt ;  probably  he  drank  too  much.  The  Pinkertons  are  not  all 
temperance  men ;  they  sometimes  take  a  little,  and  sometimes  possibly  take 
a  little  too  much;  possibly  he  talked  a  little  more  than  he  ought  to  have 
talked;  possibly  he  ciidn't  care,  but  at  any  rate  it  is  sworn  to  that  he  said  it; 
he  came  to  Chicago,  and  the  bomb  was  heard  from  and  heard  around  the 
world.  Your  honor,  is  this  an  unreasonable  assumption?  It  is  far  more 
likely,  much  more  reasonable  than  your  honor's  surmise  that  I  instigated 
some  one  to  do  it.  Is  this  not  within  the  possibility  of  human  events? 
Might  this  not  be  the  case?  -Is  it  proven,  your  honor,  incontestibly  and 
incontrovertible,  that  it  was  not  done  by  this  man,  that  it  was  not  done  by  a 
Pinkerton?  Is  it  proven  beyond  any  possibility  of  a  doubt  that  I  and  some 
of  these  men  here  threw  that  bomb,  or  knew  of  its  being  thrown?  It  is  not 
established.  The  testimony  does  not  show  it. 

These  squealers  for  the  State,  Waller  and  Schroeder,  both  state  that  this 
meeting  was  for  defense,  that  it  had  no  reference  to  the  Haymarket,  had 
nothing  to  do  with  it;  they  were  not  even  to  go  there;  there  was  no  diffi- 
culty expected  there.  These  are  the  State's  own  witnesses  and  against  the 
testimony  of  Gilmer,  that  Spies  lit  the  bomb,  which  is  ridiculous  in  itself, 
absurd,  the  very  idea  of  such  a  thing.  Mr.  Bonfield  and  Lieutenant  Haas 
said  that  the  bomb  was  thrown  south  of  the  alley  about  fifteen  feet,  and 
Burnett  comes  upon  the  stand — a  man  who  is  unimpeached — and  swears  that 
he  stood  by  the  man  who  did  throw  the  bomb,  and  saw  him  light  and  throw 
it.  All  this  against  Gilmer,  the  affidavit  of  DeLuce,  and  the  statements  of  the 
witnesses  on  the  part  of  the  prosecution.  I  submit  that  we,  for  this  reason 
are  entitled  to,  and  have  a  right  to  stand  here  and  claim  a  new  hearing 
before  you.  I  am  told  that  it  is  a  statement  from  the  prefecture  of  the  Paris 
police,  that  the  police  themselves  instigate  troubles  often  to  bring  about 
certain  results,  In  police  circles  such  persons  are  known  as  procurators  or 
provocatives.  I  don't  know  whether  this  is  true  or  not.  You  are  a  judge  and 
a  court;  you  are  familiar  with  these  things.  Now,  this  description  of  the 
stranger  dressed  in  dark  clothes,  and  not  tall,  exactly  corresponds  with 
Burnett's  description  of  the  man  he  saw,  both  light  and  hurl  the  bomb, 
and  Burnett  stood  there.  You  remember  it ;  Burnett  was  standing  right 
about  here  when  he  testified;  he  said  that  he  was  standing  by  the  side  of  the 
man  and  saw  the  man  light  the  bomb,  and  hurl  it  in  that  direction.  It  tallies 
with  the  man  sworn  to  here  by  John  Philip  DeLuce,  the  man  called  for 
by  the  New  York  Times,  Herald  and  Tribune  by  implication  at  least,  that 
this  thing  must  be  stopped.  Pinkerton  comes  out  in  a  circular  and  offers  to 
do  this  kind  of  work.  It  is  the  hand  of  the  police.  Now  is  it  anything 
beyond  human  reason  that  these  men  could  not  carry  out  that  which  they  said 
they  were  ready  to  do — to  do  that  which  they  themselves  claimed  it  would 
be  worth  to  them  millions  to  do?  I  am  not  putting  statements  in  their 
mouths.  They  stated  here  that  they  were  ready  to  do  such  work;  perhaps 
they  may  have  overdone  the  work;  perhaps  they  killed  more  men  than  they 
intended  to  kill ;  perhaps  that  may  be  true.  Perhaps  they  did  not  intend 
that  it  should  be  so  great  a  sacrifice  as  it  was;  but  I  will  continue  with 
reference  to  this;  Burnett's  description  of  the  identical  man  he  saw  both 
light  and  hurl  the  bomb  thirty-five  feet  south  of  the  alley,  shows  that  the 
prediction  of  the  stranger  from  New  York  city,  "You  will  hear  from  jt,"  was 
verified  within  twenty-four  hours,  because  it  was  not  a  dynamite  but  an 
infernal  bomb  of  which  this  stranger  boasted  in  his  cups  when  pointing  to  the 
satchel  and  saying,  "I  have  something  in  here  that  will  work;  you  will  hear 
of  it;  you  will  shortly  hear  of  trouble  in  Chicago,"  speaking  of  the  pending 
troubles  in  this  city. 

Within  twenty-four  hours  after  this  incident  at  Indianapolis,  as  sworn 
to  before  this  court,  the  something  in  that  satchel  was  heard  from,  and  its 
detonation  is  still  ringing  in  the  ears  of  a  startled  world.  The  day  follow- 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  97 

ing,  the  5th  of  May,  the  Daily  News  of  Chicago  published  the  first  description 
in  print  of  the  man  who  threw  the  bomb,  from  one  who  swore  he  was 
neither  a  Socialist,  an  Anarchist,  nor  a  Communist,  but  a  mere  idle  and 
curious  spectator  at  the  meeting.  The  News  said  on  May  5 :  "The  police 
have  a  £ood  description  of  the  man  who  threw  the  bomb  at  the  Anarchists' 
meeting  last  night.  The  fellow  stood  in  front  of  John  Burnett,  a  candy- 
maker  in  the  emplov  of  Mr.  Berry,  at  the  corner  of  Washington  and  Sanga- 
mon  streets,  and  was  seen  by  him  to  throw  the  missile  of  death.  The 
atrocious  murderer  was  a  young  man,  a  little  above  medium  height,  and  well 
dressed.  He  was  seen  to  take  the  bomb  from  his  pocket  and  light  it  just  as 
the  police  drew  near.  Burnett  said  he  stood  within  two  feet  of  the  man, 
and  would  certainly  be  able  to  identify  him  should  he  meet  him  again. 
Hardly  a  moment  elapsed  after  the  bomb  was  lighted  until  the  man  lifted  his 
aim  preparatory  to  casting  it  from  him.  Every  detail  of  this  performance 
was  witnessed  by  Burnett,  who  did  not  know  what  to  make  of  this  strange 
action.  Presently  the  fuse  attached  to  the  bomb  commenced  to  burn,  and 
then,  for  the  first  time,  Burnett  realized  what  was  about  to  happen.  The 
man,  with  a  quick  jeik  of  his  arm,  sent  the  bomb  flying  through  the  air,  and 
the  next  instant  turned  to  run.  Burnett  attempted  to  follow,  but  a  stray 
bullet  struck  him  in  the  arm  and  he  fell  to  the  sidewalk.  When  he  got  up  all 
was  confusion.  The  foregoing  is  the  substance  of  the  story  told  the  reporter 
this  morning.  Detectives  were  sent  out  to  hunt  Burnett,  but  they  were  unable 
to  find  him." 

Your  honor,  this  was  the  5th  day  of  May,  the  day  following  the  Hay- 
market  affair.  Mr.  Burnett  was  found  and  repeated  the  above  facts  to  the 
district  attorney,  reaffirming  the  statement  to  which  he  subsequently  swore 
in  court  for  the  defense,  that  the  strange  man  stood  thirty-five  feet  south  of 
the  alley ;  that  he  saw  him  light  the  fuse  and  then  throw  the  bomb ;  that  he 
wore  dark  clothes;  and  it  was  proven  on  the  trial  that  Rudolph  Schnaubelt, 
the  man  Gilmcr  implicated,  wore  light  clothes  that  night,  and  this  Pinkerton 
man  had  a  mustache  and  no  chin  or  side  whiskers,  while  Schnaubelt,  the 
Anarchist,  had  both ;  and  he  was  a  man  of  medium  size,  whereas  Schnaubelt 
is  noted  for  his  great  height ;  he  is  six  feet  two  inches.  The  district  attorney 
had  to  stultify  his  own  witnesses  by  the  unsupported,  manufactured,  per- 
jured evidence  of  Gilmer,  because  for  forty  pieces  of  silver,  he  was  willing 
to  swear  that  Spies  lit  the  fuse  while  another  man  threw  the  bomb — a  very 
tall  man  in  height,  in  light  clothes,  with  a  light  or  sandy  beard.  Gilmer 
swore  than  when  Fielden  was  speaking  he  was  looking  for  a  party  he 
expected  to  find  there,  "and  I  went  back  in  the  alley  between  the  Crane  build- 
ing and  the  building  on  the  south  of  it.  I  stopped  in  the  alley  and  no'ticed 
some  parties  in  conversation  across  the  alley  on  the  south  side.  Some 
one  said :  'Here  come  the  police.'  There  was  a  man  jumped  from  the 
wagon  down  to  the  parties  somewhere  standing  on  the  south  side  of  the 
alley,  and  lit  a  match  and  touched  off  something  or  other,  and  the  man  gave 
a  couple  of  steps  forward  and  tossed  it  over  into  the  street."  Side  by  side 
with  this,  we  give  the  precise  words  of  Mr.  Bonfield,  as  published  in  the 
Chicago  Times  of  May  5,  to  a  knot  of  reporters  gathered  around  him  at  the 
station  house  half  an  hour  after  the  tragedy  occurred.  He  is  reported  in 
the  Times  of  May  5  to  have  said:  "The  exact  scene  of  the  explosion  is  near 
the  center  of  the  street  and  exactly  opposite  the  alley  on  the  east  side  which 
separates  No.  9  South  Desplaines  street  from  Crane  Brothers'  foundry.  At 
inteivals  between  this  alley  and  Randolph  street  there  are  large,  heavy,  box- 
like  frames  at  the  edge  of  the  sidewalk,  and  it  is  here  where  the  bomb  was 
thrown."  Lieutenant  Haas  located  the  spot  there  also  as  some  fifteen  feet 
south  of  the  alley,  not  in  the  alley,  as  Gilmer  would  have  it.  Yes,  the  pre- 
diction of  the  Indianapolis  stranger  was  verified.  The  bomb  was  heard  from, 
and  heard  around  the  world.  The  purpose  avowed  in  the  New  York  city 
papers  to  pick  out  the  leaders  and  make  such  examples  of  them  as  to  scare 


98          ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

the  others  into  submission,  was  put  into  successful  execution,  and  well  was 
the  diabolical  and  nefarious  plot  executed.  Eight  men —  "leaders" —  three 
labor  editors  and  five  labor  organizers  and  orators — now  before  you,  are 
here  to  receive  sentence  of  death  in  pursuance  of  that  vile  plot,  of  which  the 
Haymarket  tragedy,  in  the  hands  of  a  Pinkerton  detective,  was  the  entering 
wedge;  and  Gilmer's  testimony  is  but  a  part  of  a  scheme  to  divert  attention 
from  the  evidence  of  twelve  witnesses,  exclusive  of  Bonfield's,  to  the  Times 
reporter,  that  the  infernal  machine  was  hurled  from  fifteen  to  thirty-five  feet 
south  of  the  alley,  just  where  the  short  man  in  dark  clothes  actually  stood 
when  the  angel  of  death  was  sped  on  its  infernal  mission,  not  only  to  sacri- 
fice purposely  the  lives  of  the  policemen  on  the  ground,  but  that  the  labor 
leaders  might  be  arrested  and  doomed  to  death  under  a  charge  of  the 
commission  of  the  offense,  in  order,  as  avowed  by  the  New  York  Times,  the 
agent  and  representative  of  the  falling  stock  markets  of  the  east,  to  scare  the 
other  workingmen  into  submission  and  frighten  them  back  into  the  accept- 
ance of  the  ten  hour  plan. 

Your  honor,  if  you  please,  I  would  like  to  take  a  short  recess.  I  am 
much  fatigued.  1  have  a  few  more  words  to  say,  and  I  will  finish  them  this 
afternoon. 

The  Court — I  had  intended  not  to  have  but  one  session  of  the  court  to- 
day ,  there  has  been  now  two  hours  and  three-quarters  this  morning  and  an 
hour  yesterday,  three  hours  and  three-quarters  of  time  spent  upon  that  which, 
as  the  speaker  and  the  auditors  know,  has  had  very  little  to  do  with  the 
question  that  is  before  me,  and  it  does  not  seem  to  me  that  I  ought  to  have 
repeated  sessions  of  court  in  listening  to  repetitions  from  newspapers,  etc., 
which  never  could  be  used  upon  any  trial,  never  could  have  been,  and  never 
can  be.  I  would  very  much  prefer  to  finish  up  the  matter.  I  shall  not  re- 
strict you  as  to  time. 

Mr.  Parsons — 1  will  say,  your  honor,  I  am  now  in  the  midst  of  that 
part  of  my  statement  which  refers  more  directly  to  the  Haymarket  matter. 

The  Court — Go  on,  say  all  that  you  wish  to  say. 

[It  was  plain  to  be  seen,  however,  that  the  speaker  was  physically  un- 
able to  "go  on."] 

Mr.  Parsons — The  absolute  proof  that  the  missile  thrown  was  not  dyna- 
mite, but  what  was  known  in  the  late  civil  war  as  an  infernal  bomb,  is  in  the 
evidence  of  every  surgeon  who  testified  that  all  incisions  were  clean,  and 
that  the  fiesh  was  torn  as  from  an  explosive  in  the  interior.  It  was  testified 
by  these  scientific  men,  your  honor,  that  dynamite  is  percussive,  and  had  a 
shell  the  size  of  Lingg's  manufacture,  on  exibition  in  evidence,  been  thrown 
in  the  closed  ranks  of  the  police,  as  was  this  infernal  machine,  instead  of 
killing  but  one  on  the  spot,  and  wounding  a  few  others,  it  would  have 
blown  to  unrecognizable  fragments  the  platoons  in  the  vicinity,  and  the 
wounds,  where  there  were  wounds,  would  have  been  as  clean  as  with  solid 
projectiles. 

This  was  an  infernal  bomb  from  New  York,  brought  there  by  the  In- 
dianapolis traveler,  and  not  a  dynamite  bomb,  the  descriptions  in  its  effects 
upon  its  victims,  exactly  corresponding  with  the  description  of  those  ex- 
plosives, when  once  used  in  the  battle  on  the  Potomac.  The  hollow  bullets 
within  the  shell,  after  entering  the  victim,  exploded,  lacerating  the  flesh  and 
inflicting  ugly  internal  and  really  infernal  wounds. 

But,  dynamite  is  an  explosive  which  annihilates  its  victims.  All  experi- 
ment and  experience  demonstrates  that  fact.  The  State  of  Illinois,  to  convict 
any  man  for  using  a  dynamite  bomb  at  the  Haymarket,  must  show  that  it 
was  dynamite ;  because  the  absolutely  necessary  link  to  connect  these  defend- 
ants with  the  explosion  (and  especially  Lingg,  whom  they  charge,  and  are 
going  to  hang,  for  merely  its  supposed  manufacture  by  him),  is  the  proof  that 
it  was  a  dynamite  bomb,  and  not  an  infernal  machine,  as  they  were  called  in 
war  times.  The  positive  proof  that  it  was  not  such  a  bomb  as  Lingg  made, 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  99 

lies  in  the  fact  that  but  one  man  was  killed  outright,  and  others  being  merely 
wounded,  though  the  bomb  fell  between  two  close  platoons  of  heavily  massed 
men. 

Mark,  sir,  dynamite  is  an  explosive  which  annihilates  its  victims.  A 
pound  displaces  the  air  within  a  radius  of  one  thousand  feet.  The  adjacent 
platoon  would  have  been  blown,  as  we  have  already  said,  into  unrecognizable 
atoms,  had  it  been  a  Lingg  dynamite  bomb.  I  cite  the  case  of  France,  and 
Doran,  and  Berrige,  at  Warren,  Pennsylvania.  In  each  case  the  singular 
characteristic  of  their  death,  is  the  fact  of  the  complete  annihilation  of  matter, 
especially  of  the  human  body.  Beside  human,  the  iron  frames  of  wagons, 
and  even  ponderous  nitro  glycerine  safes,  have  been  removed  from  human 
vision  as  effectually  as  if  they  had  never  been  formed. 

This  is  not  merely  circumstantial  evidence.  It  is  proof  positive  that  it 
was  not  a  dynamite  bomb,  such  as  the  alleged  conspirators  distributed  at  the 
Monday  night  meeting  of  the  armed  group,  which  did  not  attend  the  Hay- 
market,  Lingg  himself  being  absent  some  miles  distant.  It  is  confirmation 
strong  as  proof  of  Holy  Writ  that  the  agency  used  to  destroy  our  lives  and 
the  eight  hour  movement  was  a  New  York  infernal  machine. 

Six  cf  these  condemned  men  were  not  even  present  at  the  Haymarket 
meeting  when  the  tragedy  occurred.  One  of  them  was  five  miles  away  at  the 
Deering  Harvester  Works  in  Lake  View,  addressing  a  mass  meeting  of 
2,000  workingmen.  Another  was  at  home  in  bed  and  knew  not  of  the  meet- 
ing being  held  at  all  until  the  next  day.  These  facts  your  honor,  stand  un- 
contradicted  before  this  court.  Only  one  witness — Gilmer — and  his  testimony 
is  overwhelmingly  impeached,  as  I  remarked  before — connected  the  other 
two — two  only — of  these  men  with  the  tragedy  at  the  Haymarket  at  all. 

Now,  with  these  facts,  the  attempt  to  make  out  a  case  of  conspiracy 
against  us  is  a  contemptible  farce.  What  were  the  facts  testified  to  by  the 
two  so-called  informers?  They  said  that  two  of  these  defendants  were 
present  at  the  so-called  conspiracy  meeting  Monday  night.  What  then  have 
you  done  with  the  other  six  men  who  were  not  members — who  were  not 
present,  and  did  not  know  of  the  meeting  being  held  Monday  night?  These 
two  so-called  informers  testified  that  at  the  so-called  conspiracy  meeting  of 
May  3,  it  was  resolved  that  in  the  future,  when  police  and  militia  should  at- 
tack and  club  and  kill  workingmen  at  their  meetings,  then,  and  then  only, 
they  were  in  duty  bound  to  help  defend  these  working  people  against  such 
unlawful,  unrighteous,  and  outrageous  assaults.  That  was  all  that  was  said 
or  done.  Was  that  a  conspiracy?  If  it  was,  your  honor,  it  was  a  con- 
spiracy to  do  right  and  oppose  what  is  wrong. 

But  your  sentence  says  that  it  is  criminal  for  the  workingmen  to  resolve 
to  defend  their  lives  and  their  liberties  and  their  happiness  against  brutal, 
bloody  and  unlawful  assaults  of  the  police  and  militia. 

Look  at  this  jury  for  a  moment,  observe  the  material  of  which  it  was 
composed.  There  was  juryman  Todd ;  when  he  was  accepted  on  the  jury  he 
described  himself  as  a  clothing  salesman,  and  a  Baptist.  As  soon  as  the  ver- 
dict had  been  rendered  he  was,  of  course,  interviewed.  He  said : 

"This  was  a  picked  jury;  they  were  all  gentlemen.  You  see,  Major  Cole, 
who  was  the  first  juror  accepted,  and  myself  took  the  other  jurors  in  hand  as 
soon  as  they  were  accepted."  Major  Cole,  you  will  remember,  described 
himself  as  a  bookkeeper,  and  an  Episcopalian.  Todd,  in  his  interview,  went 
on  to  tell  how,  notwithstanding  their  virtuous  professions,  when  they  went 
to  the  jury  room  they  played  cards ;  they  also  played  the  fiddle  and  guitar 
and  piano,  and  sang  songs.  In  fact,  these  gentlemen  had  a  very  merry 
time  of  it  while  engaged  in  the  trial  of  the  seven  Anarchists  for  their  lives, 
and  they  had  to  bring  a  verdict  as  becomes  gentlemen,  of  course.  What  with 
songs,  music,  carriage  drives  and  high  life  at  a  fashionable  hotel,  parlor 
theatricals  in  the  evening,  these  twelve  gentlemen  managed  to  kill  their  time, 
and  finally  returned  a  verdict  to  kill  these  abominable  seven  Anarchists, 


100  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

these  workingmen,  whose  lives,  of  course,  were  beneath  the  serious  consid- 
eration of  the  elegant  gentlemen — these  nice  gentlemen. 

Before  tht  trial  begun,  'during  its  prosecution,  and  since  its  close,  a 
satanic  press  has  shrieked  and  howled  itself  wild  like  ravenous  hyenas  for 
the  blood  of  these  eight  workingmen.  Now  this  subsidized  press,  in  the  pay 
of  monopoly  and  of  labor  enslavers,  commanded  this  court  and  commanded 
this  jury  and  ihis  prosecution  to  convict  us. 

As  a  fitting  climax  to  this  damnable  conspiracy  against  our  lives  and 
liberty  what  follows?  [The  speaker  raised  his  arms  and  pointed  his  finger 
to  the  statue  of  the  blind  "Goddess  of  Justice"  over  the  Judge's  stand.]  Oh ! 
hide  your  eyes  now ;  hide  them !  hide  them !  It  is  well  that  your  eyes  are 
bandaged  and  your  vision  obscured,  for  could  you  have  witnessed  the 
corruption  and  infamy  practiced  in  your  name  during  this  trial  you  would 
have  fled  from  this  temple  forever !  As  a  fitting  climax  to  this  damnable 
conspiracy  against  our  lives  and  liberty  some  of  Chicago's  millionaires  pro- 
posed to  raise  3  purse  of  $100,000  and  present  it  to  the  jury  for  their  verdict 
against  us.  This  was  done,  as  everybody  knows,  in  the  last  days  of  the  trial, 
and  since  the  verdict,  so  far  as  anybody  knows  to  the  contrary,  this  blood 
money  has  been  paid  over  to  that  jury ;  besides,  these  jurymen,  since  the 
rendition  of  their  verdict,  have  been  feted.  They  have  been  wined,  and 
dined,  and  banqueted,  and  costly  gifts  have  been  bestowed  upon  them  with  a 
lavish  hand  by  the  enemies  of  human  rights  and  human  equality.  "Oh ! 
shame,  where  is  thy  blush !  Oh !  virtue,  hast  thou  fled  to  crutlsh  beasts !" 

No  man  was  permitted  to  serve  on  this  jury  who  was  tainted  with  the 
slightest  sympathy  for  the  working  class  in  their  struggles  against  monopoly. 
But  to  every  one  of  the  1,139  men  who  were  summoned  as  jurors  by  the 
State's  attorney,  the  State's  attorney  put  these  questions :  "Are  ^ou  a  mem- 
ber of  a  trade  and  labor  union?  Are  you  a  member  of  the  Knight  of  Labor? 
Have  you  any  sympathy  with  Communists,  Anarchists,  and  Socialists?" 
And  every  one  who  answered  in  the  affirmative  was  summarily  told  that  he 
was  excused.  Only  five  persons  out  of  1,200  jurymen  who  were  summoned 
were  among  the  list;  I  mean  there  were  only  five  workingmen  of  the  1,200 
called.  The  deputy  sheriff,  Mr.  Rice — I  believe  that  is  his  name — it  has  been 
sworn  to  in  our  plea  for  a  new  trial,  your  honor,  that  he  summoned  this  jury, 
and  the  affidavit  is  on  file  before  you  that  Deputy  Sheriff  Rice,  who  had 
charge  of  the  summoning  of  the  jurymen,  declared  he  would  summon  those 
who  would  hang  us  to  death.  Such  infamy  is  unparalleled. 

The  jury  was  a  packed  one;  the  jury  was  composed  of  men  who  arrogate 
to  themselves  the  right  to  dictate  and  rob  the  wage  workers  whom  they 
regard  as  their  hired  men;  they  regard  workingmen  as  their  inferiors  and  not 
"gentlemen."  Thus  a  jury  was  obtained,  whose  business  it  was  to  convict 
us  of  Anarchy,  whether  they  found  any  proof  of  murder  or  not.  The  whole 
trial  was  conducted  to  condemn  Anarchy.  "Anarchy  is  on  trial,"  said  Mr. 
Ingham.  "Hang  these  eight  men  and  save  our  institutions,"  shouted  Grin- 
nell ;  "these  are  the  leaders ;  make  examples  of  them,"  yelled  the  prosecution 
in  addressing  the  court  and  jury.  Yes,  we  are  Anarchists,  and  for  this,  your 
honor,  we  stand  condemned.  Can  it  be  that  men  are  to  suffer  death  for 
their  opinions?  "These  eight  defendents,"  said  the  State's  attorney  to  the 
jury,  "were  picked  out  and  indicted  by  the  grand  jury.  They  are  no  more 
guilty  than  are  the  thousands  who  follow  them.  They  were  picked  out 
because  they  are  leaders."  "Convict  them  and  our  society  is  safe,"  shouted 
the  prosecution.  And  this  in  America,  the  land  for  which  our  fathers  fought 
and  freely  shed  their  blood  that  we,  their  posterity,  might  enjoy  the  right  of 
free  speech,  free  press,  and  unmolested  assemblage. 

This  diabolical  conspiracy  against  man's  inalienable  rights,  finds  its  best 
portrayal  in  the  words  of  State's  Attorney  Grinnell,  himself  one  of  the  chief 
actors  in  this  gigantic  crime.  At  the  conclusion  of  the  trial  he  was  inter- 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  101 

viewed  by  the  agent  of  the  Associated  Press,  who  sent  out  a  full  report, 
from  which  I  quote  as  follows : 

"Do  you  propose  to  go  ahead  at  once  and  bring  other  leaders  of  Anarchy 
to  the  halter?"  Mr.  Grinnell  replied:  "We  intend  to  leave  the  Anarchists 
alone  for  a  time,  and  see  whether  they  have  now  learned  what  the  right  of 
free  speech  means  in  this  country,  and  whether  they  still  hold  it  to  mean 
that  they  may  incite  men  to  riot,  murder  and  plunder.  But  I  will  say  this : 
We  have  had  in  this  trial  men  who  were  called  'squealers'  and  'informers,' 
three  or  four  cf  them.  From  these  men  we  have  obtained  the  names  of  all 
the  principal  Anarchists  in  Chicago.  We  have  them  on  the  list,  and  the 
Anarchists  dor.'t  know  it.  I  want  them  to  know  it  now ;  I  want  them  to 
know  that  they  are  marked  men,  and  if  ever  a  hand  is  raised  to  injure  a 
hair  of  the  heads  of  any  juror  or  person  connected  with  the  trial  that  is  now 
over,  every  Anarchist  might  as  well  consider  that  his  death  knell  is  sounded. 
We  have  their  names  and  will  bring  every  one  of  them  to  the  gallows.  Let 
them  understand  that." 

I  suppose  your  honor  has  attended  the  opera  bouffe  called  "The  Mikado." 
You  will  recollect  that  the  lord  high  executioner  of  the  Mikado  of  Japan, 
like  Grinnell,  had  them  all  on  the  list.  Grinnell  proposes  to  continue  to 
perpetrate  acts  which  Mayor  Harrison  says  could  not  be  done  in  any  mon- 
archical, country  with  safety,  and  which,  if  done  in  London,  would  shake 
Queen  Victoria's  throne  itself.  Mr.  Grinnell  proposes  to  keep  this  racket  up, 
to  continue  it  ad  infinitum.  This  man,  clothed  with  a  little  brief  authority, 
spreads  himself  like  a  green-bay  tree  and  gasconades  with  the  fulsomeness  of 
an  autocrat.  He  would  with  the  mailed  hand  of  power  silence  the  people's 
discontent  and  preserve  law  and  order  with  silence  of  the  graveyard  and 
the  order  that  reigned  in  Warsaw.  At  the  behoof  of  this  petty  usurper  the 
Alarm,  the  paper  of  which  I  was  an  editor,  was  seized  and  suppressed.  This 
man  seized  it :  he  destroyed  the  files  and  the  documents  connected  with  the 
office.  He  did  the  same  with  the  German  workingmen's  daily  paper,  the 
Arbeiter-Zeitung,  and  for  several  weeks,  yes,  several  weeks,  this  man  com- 
pelled its  publishers  and  its  editor  to  submit  their  editorials  to  him  for  his 
press  censorship,  he  running  his  blue  pencil  through  such  articles  as  his 
majesty  Grinnell  saw  fit  to  interdict. 

In  an  interview  concerning  this  matter,  published  in  the  Chicago  papers, 
Grinnell  said :  "Very  rigid  measures  will  be  adopted  otward  the  Arbeiter- 
Zeitung.  Any  reference  to  alleged  bribery  of  the  jury  or  other  incendiary 
utterances  will  cause  its  instant  suppression.  We  are  going  to  .see  this  mat- 
ter clear  through." 

Thus  the  men  who  are  selected  to  enforce  the  law  and  who  are  sworn 
and  paid  to  obey  it  and  enforce  it,  trample  the  law  and  the  constitution  under 
their  feet  at  the  behest  of  a  few  rich  men  when  they  find  it  convenient  to 
punish  the  poor.  Thus  the  blasphemous  conspiracy  against  free  speech,  free 
press  and  public  assemblage  was  concocted,  engineered  and  consummated. 

In  the  effort  of  the  prosecution  to  hold  up  our  opinions  to  public  execra- 
tion they  lost  sight  of  the  charge  of  murder.  Disloyalty  to  their  class,  and 
their  boasted  civilization  is  in  their  eyes  a  far  greater  crime  than  murder. 
Anarchy,  in  the  language  of  Grinnell,  is  simply  a  compound  of  robbery, 
incendiarism  and  murder.  Now,  your  honor,  this  is  the  official  statement  of 
Mr.  Grinnell,  and  against  his  definition  of  Anarchy  I  would  put  that  of  Mr. 
Webster.  I  think  that  is  pretty  near  as  good  authority  as  that  gentleman's. 

What  is  Anarchy?  What  is  the  nature  of  the  dreadful  thing — this 
Anarchy,  for  the  holding  of  which  this  man  says  we  ought  to  suffer  death? 
The  closing  hours  of  this  trial,  yes,  for  five  days  the  representatives  of  a 
privileged,  usurped  power  of  despotism  sought  to  belie,  misrepresent  and 
vilify  the  doctrine  in  which  I  believe.  Now,  your  honor,  let  me  speak  of 
that  for  a  moment.  What  is  Anarchy?  What  are  its  doctrines 

General  Parsons — For  which  you  are  called  upon  to  die. 


102  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

Mr.  Parsons — For  which  I  am  called  upon  to  die.  First  and  foremost,  it 
is  our  opinion,  or  the  opinion  of  an  Anarchist,  that  government  is  despotism; 
government  is  an  organization  of  oppression,  and  law,  statute  law,  is  its 
agent.  Anarchy  is  anti-government,  anti-rulers,  anti-dictators,  anti-bosses  and 
drivers.  Anarchy  is  the  negation  of  force ;  the  elimination  of  all  authority 
in  social  affairs;  it  is  the  denial  of  the  right  of  domination  of  one  man  over 
another.  It  is  the  diffusion  of  rights,  of  power,  of  duties,  equilly  and  freely 
among  all  the  people.  But  Anarchy,  your  honor,  like  many  other  words,  is 
defined  by  Webster's  dictionary  as  having  two  meanings.  In  one  place  it  is 
denned  to  mean,  "without  rulers  or  governors."  In  another  place  it  is  de- 
nned to  mean,  "disorder  and  confusion."  Now,  this  latter  meaning  is  what 
we  call  "capitalistic  Anarchy,"  such  as  is  now  witnessed  in  all  portions  of 
the  world  and  especially  in  this  court  room ;  the  former,  which  means  with- 
out rulers,  is  what  we  denominate  Communistic  Anarchy,  which  will  be 
ushered  in  with  the  social  revolution. 

Socialism  is  a  word  which  covers  the  whole  range  of  human  progress 
and  advancement.  Socialism  is  denned  by  Webster — I  think  I  have  a  right 
to  speak  of  this  matter,  because  I  am  tried  here  as  a  Socialist.  T  am  con- 
demned as  a  Socialist,  and  it  has  been  of  Socialism  that  my  friend  Grinnell 
and  these  men  had  so  much  to  say,  and  I  think  it  right  to  speak  before  the 
country,  and  be  heard  in  my  own  behalf,  at  least.  If  you  are  going  to  put 
me  to  death,  then  let  the  people  know  what  it  is  for.  Socialism  is.  defined 
by  Webster  as  "a  theory  of  society  which  advocates  a  more  precise,  more 
orderly,  and  more  harmonious  arrangement  of  the  social  relations  of  mankind 
than  has  hitherto  prevailed."  Therefore  everything  in  the  line  of  progress, 
in  civilization,  in  fact,  is  Socialistic.  There  are  two  distinct  phases  of 'So- 
cialism in  the  labor  movement  throughout  the  world  today.  One  is  known 
as  Anarchism,  without  political  government  or  authority,  the  other  is  known 
as  State  Socialism  or  paternalism,  or  governmental  control  of  everything. 
The  State  Socialist  seeks  to  ameliorate  and  emancipate  the  wage  laborers 
by  means  of  law,  by  legislative  enactments.  The  State  Socialists  demand  the 
right  to  choose  their  own  rulers.  Anarchists  would  have  neither  ruiers  nor 
law  makers  of  any  kind.  The  Anarchists  seek  the  same  ends  by  the  abroga- 
tion of  law,  by  the  abolition  of  all  government,  leaving  the  people  free  to 
unite  or  disunite,  as  fancy  or  interest  may  dictate,  coercing  no  one,  driving 
no  party. 

Now,  your  honor,  we  are  supported  in  this  position  by  a  very  distin- 
guished man  indeed,  no  less  a  man  than  Buckle,  the  author  of  "The  History 
of  Civilization."  He  states  that  there  have  been  two  opposing  elements  to 
the  progress  of  civilization  of  man.  The  first  of  these  two  is  the  Church; 
the  Church  which  commands  what  a  man  shall  believe.  And  the  other  is  the 
State,  which  commands  him  what  to  do.  Now,  sir,  Buckle  says  that  the  only 
good  laws  passed  in  the  last  three  or  four  hundred  years  have  been  laws 
that  repealed  other  laws.  That  is  the  view  exactly  of  Anarchists.  Our  belief 
is  that  all  these  laws  should  be  repealed,  and  that  is  the  only  good  legisla- 
tion that  could  possibly  take  place. 

Now,  law  is  license,  and  consequently  despotic.  A  legal  enactment  is 
simply  something  which  authorizes  somebody  to  do  something  to  somebody 
else  or  for  somebody  else  that  he  ccruld  not  do  were  it  not  for  the  statute. 
Now,  then,  the  statute  is  the  divestment  and  the  denial  of  the  right  of 
nnother,  and  we  hold  that  to  be  wrong;  we  consider  that  the  invasion  of  a 
man's  natural  right.  Mark  you,  we  do  not  object  to  all  laws;  the  law  which 
is  in  accordance  with  nature  is  good.  The  constitution  of  the  United  States, 
when  it  guarantees  me  the  right  of  free  speech,  a  free  press,  and  of  unmo- 
lested assemblage,  and  the  right  of  self-defense,  is  good,  because  it  sanctions 
it.  Why?  Because  it  is  in  conformity  with  natural  law.  It  doesn't  require 
any  statute  law  to  provide  such  a  safeguard  as  that;  that  is  inalienable,  and 
it  is  a  natural  right,  inherited  by  the  very  fact  of  my  existence,  and  the  mere 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  103 

fact  that  it  is  embraced  in  the  constitution  does  not  make  it  any  more  sacred 
at  all.  On  the  contrary,  it  shows  how  foolish  it  is  to  do  by  constitution  that 
which  kind  mother  Nature  has  already  freely  and  graciously  done  for  us. 
The  more  we  are  governed  the  less  we  are  free.  I  do  not  believe  your  honor 
will  deny  that. 

The  law-abiding  citizen,  especially  if  he  is  called  upon  to  do  something 
under  a  law  that  enslaves  him,  is  an  uncomplaining  slave  to  the  power  that 
governs  him.  Imagine  a  chattel  slave  down  south  who  was  law-abiding, 
who  was  obedient;  what  does  that  mean?  That  means  he  did  not  have  any 
objection;  he  did  not  have  anything  to  say  against  the  law  that  makes  him 
another  man's  slave.  Now,  the  workingman  today  in  this  country  who  says 
nothing,  who  makes  no  objection  to  any  of  these  enactments,  with  no  pro- 
tests to  make  at  all  against  these  infamous  things  that  are  practiced  by  leg- 
islation, that  workingman  is  a  law-abiding,  obedient  workingman.  He  is  a 
nice,  quiet,  peaceful,  genteel  citizen. 

Anarchists  are  not  that  kind.  We  object  to  those  laws.  Now,  whether 
the  government  consists  of  one  over  the  million,  or  a  million  over  one,  an 
Anarchist  is  opposed  to  the  rule  of  majorities  as  well  as  minorities.  If  a 
man  has  a  right  he  has  a  right,  whether  that  right  be  denied  by  a  million  or 
by  one.  Right  is  right,  and  the  majority  that  sets  itself  up  to  dictate  to 
minorities  simply  transforms  itself  into  tyrants ;  they  become  usurpers ;  they 
deny  the  natural  right  of  their  fellow-men.  Now,  sir,  this  would  put  an  end 
to  the  law  factory  business.  What  would  become  of  your  law  makers?  Why, 
a  human  law  maker,  your  honor,  in  my  humble  judgment,  is  a  human  hum- 
bug. Yes,  sir,  just  think  of  these  law  factories  that  we  have  throughout  the 
country,  the  legislatures  of  our  States  and  the  Union,  where  they  manufac- 
ture laws  just  as  we  go  to  a  factory  to  manufacture  a  pair  of  boots !  Why, 
your  honor,  the  same  pair  of  boots  won't  fit  every  man ;  how  can  you  make 
a  law  that  will  apply  to  the  individual  cases  of  each  one? 

Now,  your  honor,  I  suppose  that  you  would  hold,  like  they  did  in  the 
days  of  old — I  don't  know  whether  you  will  or  not,  but  there  are  some  men 
who  would  hold — that  a  man  who  would  adhere  to  this  kind  of  opinions 
ought  to  die ;  that  this  world  has  got  no  use  for  him.  Well,  that  remains  to 
be  seen. 

The  natural  and  the  imprescriptible  right  of  all  is  the  right  of  each  to 
control  oneself.  Anarchy  is  a  free  society  where  there  is  no  concentrated  or 
centralized  power,  no  State,  no  king,  no  emperor,  no  ruler,  no  president,  no 
magistrate,  no  potentate  of  any  character  whatever.  Law  is  the  enslaving 
power  of  man.  Blackstone  defines  the  law  to  be  a  rule  of  action.  I  believe 
that  is  it.  Colonel  Foster,  I  would  like  to  ask  your  opinion  if  that  quotation 
is  correct.  Blackstone  describes  the  law  to  be  a  rule  of  action,  prescribing 
what  is  right  and  prohibiting  what  is  wrong.  Very  true.  Now,  Anarchists 
hold  that  it  is  wrong  for  one  person  to  prescribe  what  is  the  right  action  for 
another  person,  and  then  compel  that  person  to  obey  that  rule.  Therefore, 
right  action  consists  in  each  person  attending  to  his  business  and  allowing 
everybody  else  to  do  likewise.  Whoever  prescribes  a  rule  of  action  for  an- 
other to  obey  is  a  tyrant,  a  usurper,  and  an  enemy  of  liberty.  This  is  pre- 
cisely what  every  statute  does.  Anarchy  is  the  natural  law,  instead  of  the 
man  made  statute,  and  gives  men  leaders  in  the  place  of  drivers  and  bosses. 
All  political  law,  statute  and  common,  gets  its  right  to  operate  from  the 
statute ;  therefore  all  political  law  is  statute  law.  A  statute  law  is  a  written 
scheme  by  which  cunning  takes  advantage  of  the  unsuspecting,  and  provides 
the  inducement  to  do  so,  and  protects  the  one  who  does  it.  In  other  words,  a 
statute  is  the  science  of  rascality  or  the  law  of  usurpation.  If  a  few  sharks 
rob  mankind  of  all  the  earth,  turn  them  all  out  of  house  and  home,  make 
them  ragged  slaves  and  beggars,  and  freeze  and  starve  them  to  death,  still 
they  are  expected  to  obey  the  statute  because  it  is  sacred.  This  ridiculous 
nonsense  that  human  laws  are  sacred  and  that  if  they  are  not  respected  and' 


104  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS. 

continued  we  cannot  prosper,  is  the  stupidest  and  most  criminal  nightmare  of 
the  age.  Statutes  are  the  last  and  greatest  curse  of  man,  and  when  destroyed 
the  world  will  be  free.  The  statute  book  is  a  book  of  laws  by  which  one 
class  of  people  can  safely  trespass  upon  another.  Without  this  book  one 
person  would  never  dare  to  trespass  upon  the  rights  of  another.  Every  statute 
law  is  always  used  to  oppose  some  natural  law.  (I  am  reading  a  few 
extracts  from  an  editorial  in  the  Alarm.)  A  statute  is  always  used  to  oppose 
some  natural  law,  or  to  sustain  some  other  equally  vicious  statute.  The 
statute  is  the  great  science  of  rascality  by  which  some  few  trample  upon  and 
enslave  the  many.  There  are  natural  laws  provided  for  every  work  of  man. 
Natural  laws  are  self-operating.  They  punish  all  who  violate  them,  and 
reward  all  who  obey  them.  They  cannot  be  repealed,  amended,  dodged,  or 
bribed,  and  it  costs  neither  time,  money,  nor  attention  to  apply  them.  It  is 
time  to  stop  legislating  against  them.  We  want  to  obey  laws,  not  men,  not 
the  tricks  of  men.  Statutes  are  human  tricks.  The  law — the  statute  law — 
is  the  coward's  weapon ;  the  tool  of  the  thief,  and  more — the  shield  and 
buckler  of  every  gigantic  villainy,  and  frightful  parent  of  all  crimes.  Every 
great  robbery  that  was  ever  perpetrated  upon  a  people  has  been  by  virtue  of 
and  in  the  name  of  law.  By  this  tool  of  thieves  the  great  mass  of  the  people 
who  inhabit  our  planet  have  been  robbed  of  their  equal  right  to  the  use 
of  the  soil  and  of  all  other  natural  opportunities.  In  the  name  of  this 
monster  (statute  law)  large  sections  of  our  race  have  been  bought  and  sold 
as  chattels ;  by  it  the  vast  majority  of  the  human  race  are  today  held  in  the 
industrial  bondage  of  wage  slavery,  and  in  its  name  our  fair  earth  has  been 
times  without  number  deluged  in  human  blood.  By  the  instrumentality  of 
this  tool,  cowards  and  thieves,  tyrants  and  usurpers  are  robbing  their  fellows 
of  their  substance,  despoiling  them  of  their  natural  rights,  and  depriving  them 
of  liberty.  Man's  legal  rights  are  everywhere  in  collision  with  man's  natural 
rights ;  hence  the  deep-rooted  and  widespread  unrest  of  modern  civilization. 
The  only  sacred  right  of  property  is  the  natural  right  of  the  workingman  to 
the  produce,  which  \L  the  creation  of  his  labor.  The  legal  right  of  the  capi- 
talist to  rent  and  interest  and  profit  is  the  absolute  denial  of  the  natural 
right  of  labor.  Free  access  to  the  means  of  production  is  the  natural  right 
of  every  man  able  and  willing  to  work.  It  is  the  legal  right  of  the  capitalist 
to  refuse  such  access  to  labor,  and  to  take  from  the  laborer  all  the  wealth  he 
creates  over  and  above  a  bare  subsistence  for  allowing  him  the  privilege  of 
working. 

A  laborer  has  the  natural  right  to  life,  and  as  life  is  impossible  without 
the  means  of  production  the  equal  right  to  live  involves  an  equal  right  to 
the  means  of  production.  The  legal  right  of  the  capitalist  is  virtually  the 
assertion  that  one  man  has  a  greater  right  to  life  than  another  man,  since  it 
denies  the  equality  of  natural  conditions.  Our  present  social  system,  there- 
fore, is  based  upon  the  legalization  of  robbery,  slavery,  and  murder.  The 
laborer  who  does  not  get  more  than  a  bare  subsistence  as  the  fruit  of  his 
toil  is  robbed.  The  laborer  who  is  forced  to  beg  for  work  and  has  to  accept 
it  on  any  terms  or  starve  is  a  slave.  The  laborer  who,  being  unable  to  get 
work,  but  who  in  turn  has  too  much  manhood  to  beg,  steal,  or  become  a 
pauper,  is  by  the  refined  process  of  slow  starvation  murdered. 

Laws — just  laws — natural  laws — are  not  made,  they  are  discovered ;  law 
enacting  is  an  insult  to  divine  intelligence ;  and  law  enforcing  is  the  impeach- 
ment of  God's  integrity  and  his  power.  I  make,  as  an  Anarchist,  this  declara- 
tion for  the  benefit  of  our  Christian  ministry,  who,  while  professing  loyalty 
to  God's  laws,  never  forget  to  pray  and  work  for  the  supremacy  of  man's 
laws  and  man's  government — those  pious  frauds  who  profess  their  faith  in 
the  "power"  of  God,  while  they  employ  the  police,  the  militia,  and  other 
armed  hirelings  to  enforce  their  man-made  laws  and  maintain  their  "power" 
over  their  fellow-men.  Oh,  consistency,  indeed  thou  art  a  jewel!  These 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  105 

hypocrites  always  did,  and  do  today,  employ  brute  force  to  compel  their 
fellow-men  to  obey  and  serve  them,  while  they  whine  and  snivel  behind  their 
sanctimonious  masks  about  their  "love  of  man  and  the  power  of  God."  I 
hope  some  of  them  will  preach  in  their  pulpits  next  Sunday  morning  on  this 
topic. 

The  economic  regulates  and  controls  the  social  status  of  man;  the  mode 
and  manner  of  producing  our  livelihood  affects  out  whole  life;  the  all- 
pervading  cause  is  economic,  not  political,  moral,  or  religious,  and  social 
institutions  of  every  kind  and  degree  result  from,  grow  out  of,  and  are 
created  by  the  economic  or  industrial  regulations  of  society.  Every  human 
being,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  is  affected  and  controlled  by  it  in  what 
they  think,  or  say,  or  do.  There  is  no  escape ;  no  evasion  from  its  conse- 
quences. It  is  logic.  It  is  cause  and  effect.  Evil  exists  on  every  hand;  the 
well  disposed,  philanthropic,  and  generous,  and  the  good  seek  relief  from 
these  evil  influences  by  moral  suasion,  by  self-denial,  by  religion,  by  politics, 
etc.,  etc.,  but  in  vain,  in  vain !  The  evils  remain,  and  not  only  remain,  but 
grow  worse  and  worse.  Why,  if  the  fountain  is  corrupt,  can  the  stream  be 
pure?  If  the  cause  remains,  must  not  the  effects  follow?  Jails,  judges  and 
executioners,  police,  armies  and  navies,  pestilence,  misery  and  ignorance  and 
debauchery,  and  evils  of  all  kinds  of  high  and  low  degree,  all  flow  from  one 
fountain ;  that  flowing  fountain  of  human  woe  is  the  economic  or  industrial 
subjection  and  enslavement  of  man  to  man.  Every  human  ill  is  produced  by 
the  denial  or  the  violation  of  man's  natural  rights  or  by  the  neglect  or  refusal 
of  man  to  conform  his  life  to  the  requirements  of  nature.  Wickedness, 
wretchedness,  ignorance,  vice,  crime,  poverty  are  the  penalties  which  nature 
inflicts  upon  her  disobedient  children.  The  natural  man  is  a  happy  man.  He 
is  virtuous  and  right ;  truly  so.  Whoever  violates  the  right  of  another,  sooner 
or  later  punishes  himself.  Nature  is  inexorable.  From  her  penalty  there  is 
no  escape.  But  in  a  court  of  law — of  so-called  "justice" — if  you  are  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Citizens'  Association,  or  if  you  have  a  big  bank  account — in  other 
words,  if  you  are  a  member  of  the  propertied  class,  you  crawl  out  of  any- 
thing you  want  to,  for  law  is  for  sale ;  that  is  to  say,  whoever  can  purchase 
the  lawyer,  stock  the  jury  and  bribe  the  court,  can  win.  Therf  is  only  one 
law  for  the  poor — to-wit. :  Obey  the  rich. 

The  existing  economic  system  has  placed  on  the  market  for  sale  man's 
natural  rights.  What  are  these  rights?  Well,  among  the  many  I  will 
enumerate  one  or  two.  The  right  to  live,  for  instance,  is  an  inalienable 
right.  So,  too,  is  the  right  to  liberty  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness.  Now, 
how  can  I  possess  these  rights  and  enjoy  them,  when  the  very  condition  and 
the  means  for  their  procurement  are  owned  by  and  belong  to  another? 

Shakespeare  makes  Shylock  say  at  the  bar  of  the  Venetian  court,  "You 
do  take  my  life  when  you  take  the  means  whereby  I  live."  Now,  the  means 
of  life  are  monopolized;  the  necessary  means  for  the  existence  of  all  have 
been  appropriated  and  monopolized  by  a  few.  The  land,  the  implements  of 
production  and  communication,  the  resources  of  life  are  now  held  as  private 
property,  and  its  owners  exact  tribute  from  the  propertyless.  In  this  way 
the  privileged  class  become  millionaires.  They  deny  the  equal  right  of  every 
one  to  freely  use  our  natural  inheritance,  the  earth.  The  denial  of  that  right 
is  death  to  whom  it  is  denied.  The  right  to  live  is  made  a  privilege  by  law, 
granted  by  law,  which  is  granted  or  denied  by  the  possessor  to  the  dispos- 
sessed. Human  rights  are  for  sale.  "If  thou  wilt  not  work,  neither  shalt 
thou  eat,"  says  the  Scriptures.  This  finds  immunity  among  those  who  can 
pay  for  it.  Those  who  work  eat  not ;  and  those  who  eat  work  not.  They 
do  not  have  to ;  they  hire  some  hungry,  poor  devil  to  work  for  them.  The 
hired  man  whom  the  capitalist  press  gloats  on  the  idea  of,  and  whom  the 
pious  frauds  declare  is  the  dispensation  of  divine  providence,  whom  we  will 
always  have  among  us  is  a  social  fungus,  the  outgrowth  of  a  rotten,  corrupt 
industrial  regime. 


106  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

In  conclusion,  I  will  say,  compulsion  is  slavery,  and  those  disinherited  of 
their  natural  rights  must  hire  out  and  serve  and  obey  the  oppiessing  class  or 
starve.  There  is  no  other  alternative.  Some  things  are  priceless,  chief  among 
which  is  life  and  liberty.  A  freeman  is  not  for  sale  or  hire. 

You  accuse  the  Anarchists  of  using  or  advising  the  use  of  force;  it  is 
false.  "Out  of  your  own  mouth  you  stand  condemned."  The  present  exist- 
ing state  of  society  is  based  upon  and  maintained  and  perpetuated  by  force. 
This  capitalistic  system  that  we  have  today  would  not  exist  twenty- four 
hours  if  it  were  not  held  together  by  the  bayonets  and  the  clubs  of  the 
militia  and  police.  No,  sir,  it  would  not !  Now,  sir,  we  object  to  this.  We 
protest  against  it.  But  you  accuse  us,  or  the  prosecution  here  accuses  us, 
of  that  very  thing  which  they  themselves  are  guilty  of.  It  is  the  old,  old 
story  of  Aesop's  fable,  the  lamb  standing  in  the  water  and  the  wolf  above 
him ;  he  looks  up ;  the  water  has  run  down,  the  wolf  stands  above  him ;  he 
looks  down  there  toward  the  lamb,  and  says,  "Ho,  there !  you  are  making 
the  water  muddy."  The  lamb  observes,  "My  friend,  I  am  below  you  in  the 
stream."  "That  doesn't  matter;  you  are  my  meat,  anyhow."  And  he  goes 
for  him  and  eats  him  up.  That  is  just  the  way  of  the  capitalist  toward  the 
Anarchist.  You  are  doing  the  very  thing  you  accuse  us  of,  and  against  which 
we  protest.  Now,  any  institution  that  is  based  upon  force  is  self-condemned ; 
it  does  not  need  any  argument,  in  my  opinion,  to  prove  it. 

The  political  economy  that  prevails  was  written  to  justify  the  taking  of 
something  for  nothing;  it  was  written  to  hide  the  blushes  of  the  rich  when 
they  look  into  the  faces  of  the  poor.  These  are  they  who  brand  Anarchy  as 
a  compound  of  "incendiarism,  robbery  and  murder" ;  these  are  they  who 
despoil  the  people ;  they  who  love  power  and  hate  equality ;  they  who  domi- 
nate, degrade  and  exploit  their  fellow-men,  they  who  employ  brute  force, 
violence  and  wholesale  murder,  to  perpetuate  and  maintain  their  privileges. 

On  July  14,  Juryman  Hamill  took  his  seat  in  the  box  here,  and  the 
question  was  asked  him : 

Q.    "Do  you  believe  in  Socialism,  Anarchism  or  Communism?" 

A.    "Some  of  the  principles  I  believe  in." 

Lawyer  Ingham  will  remember  the  juryman  said  that. 

Q.    "Do  you  believe  in  capital  punishment,  or  hanging  for  murder?" 

A.    "I  do  not." 

Q.    "Do  you  believe  in  self-defense?" 

A.    "Yes,  sir." 

Q.    "Then,  don't  you  believe  that  society  has  a  right  to  protect  itself?" 

A.    "Not  to  take  life." 

Challenged  for  cause  by  Mr.  Ingham. 

Now,  you  see  that  this  is  proof  positive  that  the  capitalistic  system  is 
upheld  by  force,  is  perpetuated  by  force.  Lawyer  Ingham  calls  it  in  a  generic 
term,  society.  What  do  you  mean  by  "society"?  What  is  "society"?  Why, 
a  wage  worker  is  no  part  of  society,  except  to  build  the  palaces  for  the  fel- 
lows who  run  society,  to  live  in,  and  furnish  them  with  fine  clothes  and  nice 
wines,  with  luxury  and  ease,  and  so  on.  They — the  workers — are  no  more 
part  of  that  society  than  the  slave  was  of  the  plantation  in  the  south.  They 
are  part  of  the  society  as  the  mud-sills  who  do  the  work,  but  have  no  part  of 
the  benefits.  That  is  the  society  to  which  my  friend  Ingham  refers. 

Now,  we  do  not  want  to  obey — we  Anarchists ;  we  do  not  want  to  obey 
this  society — this  generic  society.  What  is  Vanderbilt,  Gould,  Mr.  Phil. 
Armour,  and  a  lot  of  that  kind?  They  are  the  parasite:?,  the  leeches,  who 
take  all  and  cry  for  more.  That  is  society.  That  constitutes  the  present  so- 
ciety. Now,  we  do  not  like  those  fellows ;  we  do  not  want  to  obey  them. 
We  do  not  want  to  serve  them ;  we  do  not  want  to  be  slaves  to  them,  and  by 
golly,  they  are  going  to  take  our  lives  because  we  do  not  want  to  obey  them ; 
because  we  are  Anarchists,  for  Anarchy  simply  means  disobedience.  Now  is 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  107 

that  not  infamous — is  that  not  ridiculous?  The  present  society  is  the  slavery 
of  labor. 

Now,  every  juryman  was  asked  these  questions  by,  I  believe,  Mr.  Grin- 
nell — or  Mr.  Ingham — one  or  the  other: 

"Do  you  believe  in  the  enforcement  of  the  law?" 

"Do  you  believe  that  society  has  a  right  to  protect  itself  by  law?" 

"Have  you  any  sympathy  for  any  person  or  class  whose  object  is  the 
overthrow  of  the  law,  or  whose  object  is  to  overthrow  law  and  government 
by  violence?" 

Now,  your  honor,  what  is  government  but  violence?  What  is  it?  Force. 
The  last  resort  of  every  law  is  force.  They  have  in  reserve,  always  in  re- 
serve, you  understand,  the  police  and  the  militia,  always;  as  long  as  nobody 
questions  the  law,  of  course,  nothing  is  said  about  the  club  or  the  bayonet. 
But  let  a  strike  take  place;  let  the  working  class  object  to  overwork,  star- 
vation wages,  or  compulsory  idleness,  then  out  come  the  police,  the  militia, 
and  the  Pinkerton  army  to  preserve  "law  and  order,"  to  force,  to  drive  the 
workers  into  submission,  and  "protect"  society.  Thus  labor  is  enslaved  by 
law.  Oh,  you  sly  rogues !  Oh,  you  sly  fellows !  Why,  it  is  you  who  cause 
the  workingman — especially  if  he  is  an  Anarchist  like  me — to  occupy  this 
position.  He  is  damned  if  he  does,  and  he  is  damned  if  he  doesn't.  So  it 
it  tweedle-dee  and  tweedle-dum,  whichever  position  you  take  with  these 
gentlemen  upon  that  question. 

Now,  Juryman  Ames,  on  July  8,  said  he  was  a  hat  and  cap  merchant. 
He  took  a  seat  in  the  box.  In  reply  to  the  question  whether  lie  held  any 
prejudice  against  Anarchists,  Communists,  and  Socialists,  he  said :  "Well, 
my  early  education  and  bringing  up  is  entirely  against  anything  of  this  kind." 

State's  Attorney  Grinnell  then  rose  and  objected  to  asking  jurors  as  to 
their  prejudice  against  Anarchy,  Communism,  and  Socialism.  You  see,  Mr. 
Grinnell  thought  if  he  could  only  get  that  man — that  kind  of  a  fellow — on 
the  jury,  wouldn't  it  be  a  fine  thing?  He  doesn't  want  that  kind  of  a  man 
asked  the  question.  A  fellow  that  was  against  all  this  sort  of  stuff  and  this 
kind  of  thing — he  knew  that  that  kind  of  a  man  would  be  solid  for  hanging 
a  man  that  held  such  ideas.  I  suppose  that  was  his  idea;  I  don't  know 
what  else  he  could  have  objected  for.  Mr.  Grinnell  said  in  that  connection: 
"This  is  a  charge  of  murder.  This  question  of  Anarchy  is  here  too  much." 
You  remember  this,  gentlemen.  "We  are  here  to  try  these  men  for  mur- 
der, and  not  because  they  are  Anarchists."  This  was  the  second  day  of  the 
trial,  mind  you.  That  was  Mr.  Grinnell;  but  he  was  careful  to  ask  every 
one  of  the  jurymen  if  they  had  any  sympathy,  to  ask  them  if  they  were  in 
favor  of  the  labor  movement;  if  they  were  members  of  a  labor  union;  if 
they  were  members  of  a  trades  union — he  was  very  particular  to  find  that 
out — and  in  arguing  the  case  before  the  jury  he  and  his  assistants  finally 
declared  that  Anarchy  was  on  trial,  and  that  was  the  thing  we  must  be 
convicted  of. 

H.  E.  Graves  was  a  railroad  superintendent. 

Q.  "Are  you  opposed  to  labor  unions  or  prejudiced  against  members 
of  labor  organizations?" 

A.  "I  am;  I  am  opposed  to  labor  organizations  of  any  and  all  descrip- 
tions." 

Judge  Gary  inquired  of  him  as  follows: 

Q.  "You  believe  in  individualism — that  is,  every  one,  whether  a  cap- 
italist or  a  laborer,  acting  for  himself,  do  you — you  are  opposed  to  combi- 
nation?" 

A.    "Yes,  sir." 

Attorney  Foster — "Do  you  believe  in  railroad  pools?" 

A.    "Yes,  sir." 

He  was  laughed  out  of  the  court  room.    Now,  Judge  Gary,  in  his  ques- 


108  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

tions  to  this  man,  teaches  us  individualism.  Now,  that  is  Anarchy,  pure 
and  simple. 

The   Court — Do   you   take  that    from   any   short-hand    report? 

Mr.   Parsons — Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Foster — That  is  true,  so  far  as  the  answer  of  the  witness  is  con- 
cerned. 

The   Court — It  don't   sound   like   anything   I   would   say. 

Mr.  Parsons — Do  you  believe  in  individualism,  every  one,  whether  capi- 
talist or  laborer,  acting  for  himself,  do  you?  Your  honor,  I  took  that  down 
at  the  time  you  said  it.  I  did  not  take  it  from  the  short-hand  reports. 

The  Court — I  don't  care.     Go  on. 

Mr.  Foster — What  I  have  reference  to  is  what  the  juror  answered 

The  Court — My  own  language  is  cited  there.  I  don't  remember  it  now, 
but  it  is  of  nc  consequence.  Go  on. 

Mr.  Parsons — If  every  one  acted  for  himself,  as  the  judge  says,  that 
would  be  liberty,  and  liberty  is  the  end  of  authority,  of  government  and  of 
statute  laws. 

July  13 — Juryman  Reed,  a  State  street  music  dealer.  Attorney  Ingham 
says:  "If  the  prisoners  are  guilty  you  want  them  convicted;  and  if  they  are 
innocent  you  want  them  acquitted,  do  you  not?"  Then,  "can't  you  listen  to 
the  testimony  fairly  and  impartially  and  decide  whether  they  are  guilty  or 
innocent?" 

Juryman  Reed  said : 

"When  they  do  not  teach  a  doctrine  that  undermines  the  law,  that  don't 
break  the  law,  then  there  is  no  objection  to  the  labor  organizations.  There 
could  not  be  any.  I  have  a  prejudice  against  any  man  who  seeks  to  under- 
mine the  social  and  political  laws  of  the  country.  I  am  a  Freethinker." 

Now,  this  man  condemned  us  to  death,  because  we  seek  to  undermine 
the  social  and  political  laws  of  the  country.  He  is  a  Freethinker ;  we  ac- 
cepted him  for  that  reason,  because  we  thought  that,  as  he  claimed  the  right 
of  free  thought  on  religious  matters,  he  would  certainly  be  consistent  and 
give  us  the  right  of  free  thought  on  political  and  social  questions.  But  alas ! 
Juryman  Reed  is  a  Boston  man.  That  is  the  country  where  they  used  to 
burn  witches  and  condemn  religious  heretics  to  death.  The  right  to  free 
thought  has  been  acquired  after  a  century  of  bloodshed  and  struggle,  and 
now,  because  we,  the  Anarchists,  are  social  and  political  heretics,  he  stran- 
gles us  on  the  gibbet.  Juryman  Reed  concedes  the  right  of  free  thought 
while  he  denies  us  the  right  of  free  action.  What  is  the  one  worth  without 
the  other?  What  a  mockery  to  say  to  the  slave,  "You  are  free  to  think 
you  ought  to  be  free,  but  you  have  no  right  to  be  free."  To  compel  me  to 
work  and  to  suffer  for  your  benefit,  and  then  console  me  with  the  assur- 
ance that  I  am  free  to  think  what  I  please  about  it,  is  the  very  mockery 
of  liberty.  This  is  the  fruit  of  authority,  of  force,  of  government.  Juror 
Reed  would  have  been  hung  one  hundred  years  ago.  He  hangs  me  today. 
Do  you  wonder  that  I  am  an  Anarchist? 

I  will  read  from  the  Alarm  an  article  headed  "White  Slaves — The  Bit- 
ter Cry  of  Poor  Working  Girls — A  True  Picture  of  Civilization  Under  the 
Infamies  of  Capitalism — Life,  Liberty,  and  Happiness  in  America — Facts  for 
Fathers  and  Mothers  to  Consider."  Then  follows  a  two  column  article  in 
the  New  York  Evening  Telegram,  a  capitalistic  newspaper,  descriptive  of 
the  life  of  the  sewing  girls  in  New  York  city — American  girls — the  future 
mothers  of  American  citizens.  I  will  not  take  up  the  time  of  the  court  in 
reading  it  in  full.  I  will  read  a  short  extract  as  follows : 

"It  must  be  confessed  that  the  outlook  for  labor  in  all  its  branches  of 
industry  is  most  discouraging,  and  revives  the  idea  of  that  terrible  story  in 
Blackwood,  where  a  prison  of  iron  has  been  so  constructed  as  to  gradually 
contract  until  it  becomes  an  iron  shroud  that  crushes  the  prisoner  within  to 
a  shapeless  pulp.  Labor  is  encircled  by  an  iron  shroud  made  of  two  fac- 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  109 

tions,  the  tendency  of  capital  to  concentrate  itself  in  few  hands  and  the  un- 
deniable fact  that  the  number  of  laborers  will  always  increase  in  greater 
ratio  than  the  amount  of  employment  for  them.  These  items  alone  would, 
if  not  counteracted  by  some  system  that  is  vital,  reduce  the  working  class  in 
time  to  a  condition  far  worse  than  slavery.  In  fact,  slavery  has  been  in  all 
past  ages  the  one  remedy  for  the  overpowering  woes  of  labor,  but  a  remedy 
that  undermined  and  ruined  each  civilization  in  its  turn.  In  the  meantime, 
it  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  women  of  America  will  take  up  the  cause  of  their 
sex  and  publicly  denounce  the  monsters  who  propose  to  young  girls  to  work 
sixty  hours  a  week  for  less  than  will  feed  and  clothe  them.  Young  as  is 
the  American  nationality,  it  stands  front  to  front  today  with  the  wonder- 
ful problem  of  civilization.  The  cause  of  the  striking  girls  at  Wallack's  shirt 
factory  is  not  only  the  cause  of  womanhood  throughout  the  world ;  it  is 
also  the  entering  wedge  for  the  great  problem,  'What  are  rights  of  labor?' 
It  must  be  obvious  to  every  senator  and  congressman  and  to  every  dabbler 
in  political  economy  that  life  is  not  worth  living  when  honest  girls  can- 
not support  themselves  by  sixty  hours  of  intense  labor.  It  is  idle  to  prate 
about  the  great  laws  of  supply  and  demand  in  the  face  of  this  present  fact 
than  an  honest  girl,  who  works  ceaselessly  throughout  the  week,  has  not 
enough  wages  to  pay  her  board  and  clothes.  In  America  we  change  con- 
ditions and  right  wrong  by  inquiry.  In  Europe  a  social  revolution  is  brew- 
ing, however,  before  which  the  great  revolution  of  France  will  pale." 

I  merely  quoted  this  article  in  order  to  show  that  class  of  people  who 
are  crying  out  that  our  grievances  are  imaginary — that  these  grievances  are 
facts — not  imaginary. 

Well,  now,  I  come  to  consider  our  city  of  Chicago.  Take  the  manage- 
ment of  the  political  affairs  of  the  city,  your  honor.  They  are  noted  for 
their  political  corruption.  Take  these  policemen — now,  I  do  not  abuse  the 
policemen ;  the  policeman  is  a  workingman  the  same  as  I  am.  Now,  a  man's 
standing  on  the  police  force,  it  is  notorious,  depends  entirely  upon  his  abil- 
ity and  his  willingness  to  club,  and  club  often — hit  everything  that  comes 
along  and  drag  it  in.  The  policemen  have  to  get  their  positions  through  the 
aldermen.  It  is  notorious  that  they  have  to  use  corrupt  methods  to  do  it, 
and  when  a  man  is  once  on  the  force,  imagine  how  subject  he  is  to  his 
higher  officials.  Whatever  his  superior  hands  him  to  do  he  must  do.  He 
must  obey.  He  must  do  it  or  he  will  lose  his  job.  I  do  not  blame  the  po- 
lice. It  is  not  the  individuals  that  I  blame  at  all.  I  say  here,  as  I  said  at 
the  Haymarke'' — it  is  not  individuals,  it  is  not  against  the  man,  but  it  is 
against  the  system  that  produces  these  things  that  we  contend.  We  object 
to  that. 

The  charge  is  made  that  we  are  "foreigners,"  as  though  it  were  a  crime 
to  be  born  in  some  other  country. 

My  ancesters  came  to  this  country  a  good  while  ago.  My  friend  Neebe 
here  is  the  descendant  of  a  Pennsylvania  Dutchman.  He  and  I  are  the  only 
two  who  had  the  fortune,  or  the  misfortune,  as  some  people  may  look  at  it — 
I  don't  know  and  I  don't  care — to  be  born  in  this  country.  My  ancestors 
had  a  hand  in  drawing  up  and  maintaining  the  Declaration  of  Independence. 
My  great  great  grand-uncle  lost  a  hand  at  the  Battle  of  Bunker  Hill.  I  had 
a  great  great  grand-uncle  with  Washington  at  Brandywine.  Monmouth  and 
Valley  Forge.  I  have  been  here  long  enough,  I  think,  to  have  rights  guaran- 
teed, at  least  in  the  constitution  of  the  country.  I  am  also  an  Interna- 
tionalist. 

My  patriotism  covers  more  than  the  boundary  lines  of  a  single  state; 
the  world  is  my  country,  all  mankind  my  countrymen.  That  is  what  the 
emblem  of  the  red  flag  signifies-  it  is  the  symbol  of  the  free,  of  emancipated 
labor.  The  workers  are  without  a  country.  In  all  the  lands  they  are  dis- 
inherited, and  America  is  no  exception.  The  wage  slaves  are  the  dependent 
hirelings  of  the  rich  in  every  land.  They  are  everywhere  social  pariahs 


110  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

without  home  or  country.  As  they  create  all  wealth,  so  also  they  fight  every 
battle,  not  for  themselves  but  for  their  masters.  There  will  be  an  end  to  this 
self-degradation.  In  the  future  labor  will  fight  only  in  self-defense  and 
work  for  itself  and  not  for  another.  Every  government  is  a  conspiracy  to 
enslave  the  laborer. 

Take  the  morality  of  the  capitalistic  system  and  look  at  it.  In  the  mo- 
rality of  the  capitalistic  system  everything  is  for  sale.  Love,  honor,  liberty, 
everything  is  for  sale ;  everything  has  its  price,  under  this  modern  system 
of  commercialism :  profit  and  loss ;  meum  et  teum,  and  this  trains  every  man 
to  be  a  liar  and  a  hypocrite.  Men  are  taught  to  be  hypocrites,  to  carry  a 
mask  on  their  face,  to  lie,  to  misrepresent  everything.  No  man  can  be  hon- 
est and  succeed  in  business  or  make  money.  It  is  impossible.  Honesty  is 
punished  with  poverty,  while  dishonesty  revels  in  every  luxury. 

Now,  sir,  is  it  fair  to  try  a  man  by  a  class  jury  for  disloyalty  to  that 
class?  A  verdict  of  guilty  from  such  a  source  is  a  foregone  conclusion.  D<4 
you  call  such  a  trial  as  that  a  fair,  impartial,  or  unprejudiced  trial?  Non- 
sense. I  believe  if  there  had  been  some  workingmen  on  that  jury  they 
would  have  understood  something  about  this  question ;  they  would  have 
considered  the  matter  quite  differently.  They  would,  at  least,  have  given 
our  side  a  fair  chance. 

The  coal  monopoly  has  been  touched  upon.  Why,  the  capitalistic  papers 
of  Chicago  say :  "Strangle  it."  That  is  what  Fielden  said  on  the  Hay- 
market.  The  trouble  is  that  the  moment  this  thing  is  touched  you  sling 
open  the  door  of  Socialism  and  in  they  pile  pell-mell.  It  is  no  use  talk- 
ing. Three  coal  kings  met  in  the  parlor  of  a  New  York  hotel — this  was 
done  last  year — they  advanced  the  price  of  coal,  which  is  a  free  gift  of 
nature  to  all  her  children  as  much  as  air  and  fire  and  water  are ;  it  belongs 
to  the  people  alone,  as  Socialism  maintains  and  will  consummate,  even  if 
this  court  should  carry  out  and  baptize  in  blood  an  attempt  on  the  part  of 
the  people,  peaceably  and  lawfully  and  constitutionally,  to  do  and  accom- 
plish this  result.  I  say  these  coal  monopolists  advanced  the  rate  of  coal 
fifty  cents  a  ton,  the  equivalent  of  an  advance  of  $30,000,000  from  the  needy 
people  of  the  United  States. 

But  a  few  days  ago  the  same  coal  monopoly  met  again  and  advanced 
the  price  of  anthracite  fifteen  cents  per  ton,  and  by  limiting  the  output  they 
still  farther  advanced  the  price  of  what  remains  on  their  hands  in  the  mar- 
ket, and  practically  put  a  tax  for  this  prime  necessity  of  life  upon  the  peo- 
ple, west  and  east,  and  turned  the  hundred  thousand  miners  out  to  freeze 
and  starve. 

Last  year  I  was  in  the  West.  I  was  sent  for  by  the  Knights  of  Labor 
in  Kansas  on  the  4th  day  of  July,  last  July  a  year  ago,  to  address  them. 
While  traveling  that  section  I  went  throughout  Kansas,  Nebraska,  Iowa, 
and  Missouri,  and  among  the  places  I  visited  were  the  coal  mines.  I  went 
down  into  the  mines.  I  saw  the  manner  in  which  this  coal  business  was 
carried  on.  They  dig  up  the  coal  out  of  the  ground;  they  bring  it  up  to  a 
place  which  they  call  the  screening.  There  are  several  kinds  of  coal,  three 
kinds,  the  lump,  the  nut,  and  the  screenings.  Now,  the  screenings  is  the 
portion  of  the  coal  which  falls  through  a  certain  sifter,  or  sieve,  and  among 
it  is  the  dust,  little  lumps  of  coal  an  inch  and  a  half  to  three  inches  in  di- 
ameter. This  coai  constitutes,  the  miners  tell  me,  about  one-fourth  of  a 
ton  to  each  ton.  Well,  the  miner  receives  nothing  for  that  at  all,  he  doesn't 
get  a  cent ;  it  is  not  paid  for.  Last  Fourth  of  July  I  witnessed  these  things 
while  traveling  throughout  the  states,  and  when  I  returned  home,  I  was 
hard  up.  I  did  not  have  money  enough  to  buy  a  ton  of  coal  at  once.  I  had 
lo  buy  my  coal  by  the  scuttle,  and  I  paid  10  cents  a  scuttle  for  coal  that 
winter,  and  the  coal  that  I  bought  was  this  screening  coal  which  the  miners 
did  not  get  a  cent  for.  It  cost  me  $9  a  ton,  and  the  miners  did  not  get  a 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  111 

cent  for  it.  And  yet  there  are  people  here  who  say  that  these  grievances 
are  imaginary,  and  that  there  is  nothing  in  them. 

Well,  now,  here  is  a  nice  thing  to  be,  read  in  this  country,  in  this  age. 
A  man  was  interviewed  the  other  day  by  the  Chicago  papers.  His  name 
was  Lord  Shastakoff,  a  minister  of  the  Russian  navy,  traveling  in  America 
for  his  health.  This  minister,  this  master  of  the  czar's  council,  met  the  re- 
porters. He  says.  "Have  you  hanged  your  Nihilists?"  referring  to  the  con- 
demned Anarchists.  On  being  told  that  all  were  condemned  and  in  prison, 
but  they  were  not  yet  hanged,  he  expressed  the  hope  that  the  execution 
would  take  place  at  an  early  day,  and  strongly  discountenanced  any  delay  in 
the  matter.  Talk  about  foreigners — you  fellows  that  are  talking  about  for- 
eigners; I  think  that  is  a  pretty  good  one.  You  are  going  to  hang  these 
men  on  this  theory,  because  they  are  foreigners.  Actually  it  was  made  a 
point  to  the  jury — urged  upon  the  jury  by  the  State's  attorney — that  we 
were  foreigners,  and  that  we  were  hostile  to  the  great  and  glorious  institu- 
tions of  our  America.  "They  were  not  born  here;"  and  they  actually  tried 
to  make  the  jury  believe  that  none  of  us  were  born  here — that  all  of  us 
were  imported;  and  it  did  sway  that  jury;  it  did  have  its  effect  upon  that 
jury.  Now,  here  comes  this  fellow  from  the  czar's  dominions. 

He  says,  "Gentlemen,  that  has  been  a  good  job;  carry  it  out;  don't  give 
them  any  show  at  all." 

Now,  1  denounce  this  thing.  But  you  say  we  are  revolutionists.  Well, 
if  we  are,  who  made  us  such?  Are  not  the  labor  exploiters,  the  monopolists, 
the  mine,  factory  and  workshop  czars  creating  a  revolution?  They  are  the 
revolutionists. 

I  am  only  a  "kicker."  I  object,  I  say  "No!  take  your  yoke  off  my  neck, 
take  it  off,  I  will  not  have  it  on  there,"  and  they  reply,  "You  stand  still,  now, 
and  let  me  put  in  this  coupling  pin,  and  you'll  carry  that  yoke  well  enough — 
if  you  don't  I  will  have  you  carried  off  to  the  police  station ;  if  you  make 
any  noise  about  it,  I  will  have  you  hung!"  Sir,  our  execution  will  be  a  legal 
notification  to  the  American  workingmen  to  be  warned  by  our  fate  that  they 
must  not  expect  to  have  any  of  their  "imaginary"  grievances,  as  it  were, 
remedied  or  rectified. 

Now,  your  honor,  I  have  gone  into  this  matter  for  the  reason  that  you 
said  there  was  nothing  in  extenuation  for  these  utterances  and  this  kind  of 
an  organization.  1  believe  you  used  language  something  like  that.  I  have 
gone  into  this  matter  as  extensively  as  I  have  for  the  purpose  of  showing 
that,  if  your  honor  was  laboring  under  a  misapprehension,  I  wanted  to  re- 
move that  misapprehension ;  that  has  been  the  object  of  what  I  have  said  or 
had  to  say  outside  of  the  matter  or  mere  record  of  the  trial.  Now,  before 
I  conclude  on  this  point  of  extenuation,  I  want  to  read  an  editorial  in  the 
Chicago  Daily  News  of  September  25.  What  is  this?  Is  it  October?* 

General  Parsons — Yes,  the  9th  of  October. 

Mr.  Parsons — Yes.  It  is  concerning  this  workingmen's  movement :  "The 
strong  probability  of  Mr.  George's  election  in  New  York  has  also  a  mean- 
ing for  the  so-called  capitalistic  class  of  this  community.  A  brief  summary 
of  the  inception  and  progress  of  the  Anarchists'  movement,  which  terminated 
at  the  Haymarket  on  the  4th  of  May  last,  will  make  this  clear. 

"Following  the  great  railroad  strikes  of  1877  came  the  failure  of  sav- 
ings banks;  the  unpunished  defalcations  of  the  trustees  of  the  poor,  and  the 
enormous  immigration,  increasing  competition  for  work  and  bringing  with 
it  a  large  element  of  the  victims  of  Bismarck  and  of  Bismarck's  servility, 
soured  with  life  and  ready  for  desperate  deeds.  Under  such  inauspicious 


*[Xote. — I  was  greatly  exhausted  from  physical  and  mental  exertions, 
having  spoken  two  hours  the  day  before  and  over  four  hours  consecutively 
that  day,  the  judge  denying  me  a  short  respite  at  noon.  At  many  times 
during  the  speech  the  judge  had  indicated  his  impatience  by  his  actions  and 
looks,  to  the  discomfiture  of  the  speaker.  When  I  asked  this  question  I  felt 
my  memory  fall  me.] 


112  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

circumstances  workingmen's  parties  were  formed  and  tickets  put  in  the  field ; 
some  were  captured,  others  disorganized,  some  fell  into  the  hands  of  the 
Socialists,  who  found  time  to  form  a  party  which  elected  Frank  Stauber 
to  the  city  council  from  the  fourteenth  ward."  I  was  a  prominent  actor,  your 
honor,  in  all  of  this  matter  that  has  been  related  here  in  the  News. 

"Stauber  was  subsequently  re-enforced  by  the  election  of  Alpeter  in 
the  sixth  ward  and  another  one  in  the  fourteenth  and  Chris  Mayer  in  the 
fifteenth,  while  the  Socialistic  labor  candidates  for  the  fifth  and  seventh 
wards  were  only  defeated  by  a  small  majority.  Alpeter  and  Stauber  and 
his  colleagues  refused  all  overtures  from  the  ring  which  then  as  now  con- 
trolled these  politics.  They  were  proof  alike  against  bribery  and  intimidation 
and  the  party  which  they  faithfully  and  honorably  represented  was  becom- 
ing powerful  and  troublesome  as  an  opponent  to  the  ring.  At  the  city  elec- 
tion following,  a  flagrant  violation  of  the  ballot  box  was  perpetrated  in  the 
sixth  ward  by  'Cabbage'  Ryan,  through  which  Alpeter  was  defrauded  of  a 
seat,  and  the  offender  was  sheltered  from  punishment,  his  case  being  dis- 
missed without  a  hearing  in  some  manner.  This  was  followed  the  next  year 
by  the  breaking  open  of  the  box  in  the  second  precinct  of  the  fourteenth 
ward  and  the  fraud  and  perjury  by  which  Stauber  was  kept  out  of  his  seat 
for  twenty-three  months,  fraud  and  perjury  which  were  condoned  by  the 
courts.  It  was  upon  the  same  day  and  at  the  same  election  that  Cullerton 
succeeded  by  a  suspicious  majority  of  not  over  twenty  votes  over  a  Socialist 
by  the  name  of  Bauman,  and  the  council  practically  denied  the  contestant  an 
opportunity  to  present  his  rights.  One  of  these  frauds  was  perpetrated  in 
the  interest  of  the  Republican  party,  the  other  in  the  interest  of  the  Demo- 
cratic. The  record  needs  no  comment,  but  it  is  no  small  wonder  that  the 
party  was  driven  from  the  field,  unable  to  cope  with  the  rascals  of  both 
the  other  parties." 

Then  he  goes  on  to  show  that  it  was  such  things  at  this  that  brought 
about  Anarchy  and  produced  the  Haymarket  affair;  brought  that  affair  about 
— that  is,  he  is  assuming,  your  honor,  that  we,  the  men  alleged,  the  men  con- 
victed by  the  jury,  are  guilty  of  that  thing  which  we  specifically  now  and 
here  deny.  But  if  true,  the  editor  of  the  News  alleges,  that  there  were 
extenuating  circumstances ;  that  there  was  someone  else  connected  with  the 
moral  responsibility,  even  though  we  were  personally  guilty  of  the  offense. 
Now,  on  the  idea  of  extenuation,  Mayor  Harrison,  about  three  weeks  ago, 
was  asked:  "How  do  you  like  the  verdict  in  the  Anarchist  case?"  "Well, 
I  don't  care  to  talk  about  it.  We  have  punished  these  people  who  violated 
the  law,  and  now  it  remains  for  us  to  cure  the  disease."  What  does  this 
mean,  your  honor?  Why,  that  we  are  an  effect;  Mayor  Harrison  says  we 
are  an  effect.  Now  it  is  a  funny  doctor  that  would  go  to  work  to  cure  the 
effect  of  a  disease.  You  would  never  get  rid  of  the  disease,  would  you? 
You  never  would  touch  the  cause.  The  mayor  of  the  city  of  Chicago  says 
we  are  the  effect.  I  submit  this  here  as  an  extenuating  circumstance,  and 
as  a  part  of  my  plea  for  a  new  trial.  The  mayor  said :  "There  is  a  wide 
discontent  among  the  working  people — there  is  no  doubt  abou:  it ;  it  cannot 
be  cured  with  bullets  or  policemen's  clubs.  We  have  got  to  remove  the 
cause.  That  is  the  task  that  is  before  the  thinking  men,  the  law  makers, 
today.  There  is  no  doubt  but  that  the  working  people  have  reason  to  be 
discontented  all  over  the  country.  Legislation  in  the  interest  of  the  big 
corporations  and  the  monopolies  is  the  fact,  and  no  law  making  for  the 
laboring  classes.  That  is  what  makes  the  laboring  man  discontented.  You 
must  change  all  that,  and  legislators  must  be  elected  who  cannot  be  bought 
by  the  corporations,  or  what  will  happen?  The  people  will  rise  up  in  mobs, 
some  day,  and  will  have  to  be  subdued  with  the  bullet,  and  that  would  be 
the  end  of  free  government."  Why,  your  honor,  that  is  precisely  what  I 
have  said  a  hundred>  and  perhaps  a  thousand  times.  That  is  all  I  have  ever 
said — go  and  fetch  Harrison — bring  him  here.  He  is  as  much  legally  guilty 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS          .113 

on  those  words  as  I  am  this  afternoon.  I  offer  that  as  showing  that  there 
are  extenuating  circumstances,  even  though  we  be  guilty  as  charged,  which 
we  deny.  Mayor  Harrison  says  there  is  "wide  discontent  among  the  work- 
ing people  which  cannot  be  cured  with  bullets  and  policemen's  clubs."  Now, 
I  want  to  ask  this  court  if  it  thinks  that  that  discontent  can  be  cured  by 
hanging  us? 

Take  the  governor  of  this  state — Governor  Oglesby.  He  made  a  speech 
not  long  ago  on  monopoly.  He  said  that  we  stood  upon  a  social  volcano. 
What  did  he  mean?  If  he  had  made  that  remark  at  the  Haymarket  he  would 
be  in  this  box  here  today,  and  turned  over  to  the  hangman.  If  he  happened 
to  be  at  the  Haymarket  meeting  and  made  that  remark — if  there  had  been 
a  conjunction  of  circumstances  which  would  have  brought  him  to  the  Hay- 
market  and  he  had  been  a  workingman,  such  would  have  been  his  fate. 

None  of  the  men  were  arrested  before,  not  one  of  us ;  and  I  never 
was  arrested.  I  came  to  the  court  of  my  own  accord.  The  other  seven 
were  never  arrested  before,  never  were  drunk,  never  were  disorderly. 
Sober,  steady,  industrious,  intelligent,  upright,  honorable,  decent  working- 
men  ;  there  is  not  a  spot,  a  blemish,  nor  a  single  stain  against  any  of  the 
eight. 

Now  as  to  this  Gilmer  and  Burnett  matter.  I,  as  a  man  here  on  trial 
wishing  to  know  what  your  decision  is  to  be  with  reference  to  my  having  a 
chance  to  prove  my  innocence,  being  convicted  upon  the  testimony  of  a  man 
like  Gilmer,  offered  the  man  Burnett  as  an  offset  to  Gilmer.  He  was  unim- 
peached.  No  one  questioned  his  veracity.  He  stood  here  as  an  honest  man. 
Gilmer  did  not.  The  State's  attorney,  in  his  eagerness  to  produce  this  result 
— and,  by  the  way,  right  here  I  want  to  say,  it  is  no  particular  credit  for  the 
prosecution  to  bring  about  this  verdict.  All  the  rules  of  evidence  and  pro- 
cedure were  icversed  on  this  trial.  Instead  of  being  considered  innocent 
until  our  guilt  was  established,  we  have  been  held  guilty  unless  we  could 
establish  our  innocence.  Why,  the  whole  capitalistic  press,  the  whole  of  the 
police,  the  bankers,  millionaires,  etc.,  everything  was  against  these  poor  men. 
We  had  no  money,  influence,  or  friends.  It  was  not  difficult  to  bring  that 
about  at  all,  and  if  they  did  not  have  a  case  they  could  make  one  easily. 
That  was  an  easy  matter  for  them  to  do — a  very,  very  easy  thing  for  them 
to  do.  Now,  Mr.  Grinnell  must  have  known  that  Gilmer's  testimony  was 
false.  I  don't  know  whether  he  did  or  not.  But  it  seems  to  me  he  ought 
to  have  known  it,  because  it  was  clearly  demonstrated  by  the  witness  Bur- 
nett, who  stood  upon  the  stand,  and  whose  testimony  is  unimpeached,  that 
he  called  upon  and  had  talks  with  Attorney  Grinnell  as  early  as  May  6,  and 
had  a  number  of  interviews  with  him  for  the  express  purpose  of  having 
him  identify  Schnaubelt's  picture  and  fasten  the  deed  upon  Schnaubelt. 
Burnett  refused  to  do  that.  He  said:  "No,  no;  that  ain't  the  man.  Besides, 
it  was  not  that  way.  He  was  further  down.  It  was  not  up  at  the  alley." 
Now,  Burnett's  testimony  contradicted  every  statement  of  Gilmer,  and  Bur- 
nett is  unimpeached  and  Gilmer  is  impeached.  If  the  district  attorney  knew 
of  this  fact,  if  he  knew  the  fact  that  Burnett  was  an  honest  man,  and  called 
at  his  office  and  refused  to  identify  Schnaubelt,  your  honor,  did  not  the  dis- 
trict attorney  lend  himself  to  a  very  bloody  piece  of  work?  I  do  not  see 
how  he  is  going  to  get  clear  of  that.  It  may  be  he  will,  but  it  seems  to  me 
that  if  this  verdict  is  to  be  carried  out  then  our  blood  will  be  on  his  head 
for  subornation  of  perjury.  I  may  be  mistaken,  your  honor;  I  do  not  im- 
pugn any  man's  motives.  I  don't  know,  but  it  seems  to  me  it  is  the  only 
construction  which  could  be  put  upon  this  testimony. 

Two  witnesses,  since  this  verdict  was  made,  came  forward  voluntarily 
and  made  an  affidavit  that  they  had  been  in  Gilmer's  company  the  night  of 
May  4,  at  another  place,  and  that  Gilmer  was  not  at  the  Haymarket.  Then 
Mr.  Bonfield,  the  chief  of  detectives,  who  is  Grinnell's  right  hand  man — 
he  takes  these  two  men  in  his  charge,  and  by  bribery  or  intimidation,  or  by 


114  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

some  other  means,  1  don't  know  what,  he  induces  them  to  retract  their 
sworn  statement.  Wasn't  that  a  scaly  transaction,  worthy  of  the  villainy 
and  corruption  of  the  detective  department? 

Your  honor,  I  have  got  what  would  take  me  an  hour  and  a  half,  possibly 
two  hours,  at  least,  to  say.  I  am  used  to  an  active,  outdoor  life,  and  until 
my  incarceration  here  I  have  never  been  deprived  of  personal  activity,  and 
the  close  confinement  in  a  gloomy  cell — I  only  have  about  two  hours  and  a 
half  exercise  each  day,  practically  about  two  hours  of  the  twenty-four — and 
of  course  it  has  deteriorated  my  physical  system  somewhat ;  and  then,  the 
long  mental  strain  of  this  trial  in  addition  to  it.  I  thought  if  your  honor 
could  possibly  give  me  a  little  rest  for  lunch,  if  we  could  adjourn  until  twa 
o'clock — it  is  now  one  o'clock — I  don't  think  I  could  get  through  under  two 
hours.  Still,  if  your  honor  insists,  I  am  ready  to  proceed. 

The  Court — I  do  not  think  I  am  under  any  obligation  to  have  repeated 
adjournments  of  the  court  for  the  purpose  of  listening  to  the  reading  of 
newspapers  or  disquisitious  upon  political  economy,  the  question  only  being 
in  this  case,  whether  the  defendants  killed  Mathias  Degan.  That  is  the  only 
question  in  the  case 

Mr.  Parsons — Yes,  sir;  of  course. 

The  Court — Not  whether  they  did  it  with  their  own  hands,  but  whether 
they  set  causes  at  work  which  did  end  in  his  death. 

Mr.  Parsons— Well,  your  honor,  I  am  proposing  to  show  you  here  that 
by  a  new  trial,  by  a  suspension  of  the  judgment  and  sentence  of  death,  we 
can  establish  our  innocence;  that  is  what  I  am  proposing  here  to  do;  that 
is  why  I  am  offering  this.  You  quoted  our  speeches  and  read  many  articles 
from  our  labor  papers  to  prove  that  we  "set  causes  at  work  which  did  end 
in  his  (Degan's)  death."  Now,  sir,  I  am  showing  you  by  the  very  same  kind 
of  testimony  taken  from  the  speeches  and  newspapers  of  monopolists  that 
they  and  not  we  "set  causes  at  work  which  did  end  in  his  death."  And,  sir, 
I  leave  the  world  to  judge  if  our  testimony  against  them  is  not  as  'strong  or 
stronger  than  is  your  testimony  against  us.  Of  course  it  is  not  sworn  to; 
it  cannot  be.  I  cannot  get  witnesses  in  here  to  swear  to  them.  I  cannot  swear 
to  it  myself;  that  is  the  purpose  I  have  in  view.  But  you  did  not  have  our 
speeches  and  newspaper  articles  sworn  to.  You  took  them  for  granted. 
Now,  sir,  against  these  I  put  the  utterances  and  newspaper  articles  of  the 
monopolists.  Now,  my  long  review  of  the  labor  question  was  made  for  the 
express  purpose  of  having  your  honor  understand  the  motives  that  were 
actuating  us  in  this  labor  movement;  that  you  might  see  that  labor  had 
grievances ;  that  it  had  reasons  for  organizing ;  that  it  was  not  a  matter  of 
mere  peevish  discontent,  as  we  are  charged  by  some  unthinking  people,  or 
that  the  grievances  of  the  workingmen  are  imaginary,  as  alleged  by  those 
people  who  do  not  feel  any  interest  in  this  matter. 

.  In  overruling  the  motion  for  a  new  trial,  your  honor  used  this  lan- 
guage: "Whether  these  defendants,  or  any  of  them,  did  participate  or  ex- 
pect the  throwing  of  the  bomb  on  the  night  of  the  4th  of  May  is  not  a 
question  which  I  need  to  consider,  because  the  instructions  did  not  go  upon 
that  ground.  The  jury  were  not  instructed  to  find  them  guilty  if  they  be- 
lieved that  they  participated  in  the  throwing  of  the  bomb,  or  encouraged 
or  advised  the  throwing  of  that  bomb,  or  had  knowledge  that  it  was  to  be 
thrown,  or  anything  of  that  sort.  The  conviction  has  not  gone  upon  the 
ground  that  they  did  have  any  actual  participation  in  the  act  which  caused 
the  death  of  Degan,  but  upon  the  ground,  under  the  instructions,  that  they 
had  generally,  by  speech  and  print,  advised  a  large  class  to  commit  murder, 
and  had  left  the  occasion,  time  and  place  to  the  individual  will,  whim  and 
capiice  of  the  individuals  so  advised;  and  that  in  consequence  of  that  advice 
and  in  pursuance  of  it  and  influenced  by  it,  somebody  not  known  did  throw 
the  bomb  that  caused  Degan's  death.  Now,  if  that  is  not  a  correct  princi- 
ple of  law,  then  the  defendants  are  entitled  to  a  new  trial.  This  case  is  with- 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  115 

out  precedent.  There  is  no  example  in  the  law  books  of  a  case  of  this  sort. 
No  such  occurrence  has  ever  happened  before  in  the  history  of  the  world." 

Now,  your  honor,  you,  by  these  words,  frankly  admit  that  we  have  not 
been  convicted  for  any  act  done,  but  simply  because  of  speeches  made  and 
of  opinions  expressed.  I  am,  therefore,  showing  you  that  that  bomb  was 
hurled  by  labor's  enemies  at  the  instigation  of  the  monopolists,  and  not  by 
us.  Their  speeches,  their  utterances,  their  newspapers  openly  counseled  and 
advised  by  "speech  and  print"  just  such  things.  Did  they  not?  Then  are 
they  not  the  guilty  perpetrators?  The  question,  to  use  your  honor's  language, 
is  "not  Avhetber  they  did  it  with  their  own  hands,  but  whether  they  (the 
monopolists)  set  causes  at  work  which  did  end  in  the  Haymarket  tragedy." 
By  their  own  proposals  I  have  shown  you  that  they  did. 

Socialism,  your  honor,  means  the  abolition  of  wage  slavery,  because  it 
allows  the  people  to  carry  on  production  and  consumption  by  means  of  a 
system  of  universal  co-operation.  That  is  what  I  said  at  the  Haymarket.  I 
pointed  out  at  the  Haymarket  the  fact  that  the  workingmen  were  being  de- 
prived, according  to  Colonel  Wright,  the  commissioner  of  the  Bureau  of 
Labor  Statistics  of  the  United  States.  He  proves  by  the  statistics  that  they 
were  producing  values  to  the  extent  of  $10  a  day,  and  receiving  $1.15;  that 
they  were  being  deprived  of  $8.85.  Now,  I  said  to  them:  "Here,"  said  I, 
"Socialism  will  give  you  that  $8.85;  under  Socialism  you  would  get  that 
whole  $10,  whereas  under  the  wage  system  you  receive  $1.15  of  it.  But  that 
is  not  all:  Socialism  will  make  your  labor  saving  machinery  a  blessing  in- 
stead of  a  curse  to  you;  by  it  wealth  will  be  increased,  and  drudgery  dimin- 
ished indefinitely.  Socialism  is  simple  justice,  because  wealth  is  a  social,  not 
an  individual  product,  and  its  appropriation  by  a  few  members  of  society 
creates  a  privileged  class — a  class  who  monopolize  all  the  benefits  of  society 
by  enslaving  the  producing  class."  Now,  your  honor,  this  is  what  makes  the 
monopolists  mad  at  the  Anarchists.  This  angers  the  corporation  men.  See 
what  they  say.  The  result  is  that  a  verdict  must  be  brought  against  So- 
cialism ;  because,  as  the  district  attorney  states  here,  the  law,  and  the  gov- 
ernment, and  Anarchy  are  upon  trial.  That  is  the  reason.  Not  for  what  I 
did,  but  it  is  for  what  I  believe.  It  is  what  I  say  that  these  men  object  to. 
The  verdict  was  against  Socialism,  as  said  by  the  Chicago  Times  the  day 
after  the  verdict. 

"In  the  opinion  of  many  thoughtful  men  the  labor  question  has  reached 
a  point  where  blood-letting  has  become  necessary,"  says  the  Chicago  Iron- 
Monger. 

"The  execution  of  the  death  penalty  upon  the  Socialist  malefactors  in 
Chicago  will  be  in  its  effect  the  execution  of  the  death  penalty  upon  the 
Socialistic  propaganda  in  this  country. 

"The  verdict  of  death  pronounced  by  a  Chicago  jury  and  court  against 
these  Socialist  malefactors  is  the  verdict  of  the  American  people  against  the 
crime  called  Socialism,"  says  the  Chicago  Times.  By  the  American  people 
the  Times  means  the  monopolists. 

In  more  familiar  words,  as  used  heretofore  by  the  Times,  "other  work- 
ingmen will  take  warning  from  their  fate,  and  learn  a  valuable  lesson."  The 
Times  in  1878  advised  that  "hand  grenades  (bombs)  should  be  thrown  among 
the  striking  sailors,"  who  were  striving  to  obtain  higher  wages,  "as  by  such 
treatment  they  would  be  taught  a  valuable  lesson,  and  other  strikers  would 
take  warning  from  their  fate." 

So  it  seems,  "hand  grenades  for  strikers,"  and  "the  gallows  for  Social- 
ists," are  recommended  by  the  organ  of  monopoly,  as  a  terror  to  both. 

Socialism  aims  not  at  the  lives  of  individuals  but  at  the  system  which 
makes  paupers  and  millionaires  possible.  Socialism  aims  at  the  death  of  no 
man  nor  the  destruction  of  property,  and  the  capitalistic  press  lies,  and  they 
know  it,  when  they  make  such  charges  against  Socialists.  They  lie  about  us 
in  order  to  deceive  the  people;  but  the  people  will  not  be  deceived  much 


116          ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

longer.  No,  they  will  not.  The  monopolist  organs  of  our  cities  have  ad- 
vised hand  grenades,  strychnine,  arsenic  and  lead  instead  of  bread,  for  the 
unemployed  and  these  seeking  to  better  their  conditions,  long  enough.  It  is 
time  for  this  to  stop.  When  will  it  stop?  In  the  sermon  on  the  mount 
Christ  said :  "What  man  is  there  of  you  who,  if  his  son  shall  ask  him  for 
bread,  will  give  him  a  stone,  or  if  he  shall  ask  for  fish  will  give  him  a 
serpent?  All  things,  therefore,  whatsoever  ye  would  that  men  should  do 
unto  you,  do  ye  even  so  unto  them."  It  was,  however,  reserved  for  the  close 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  of  the  Christian  era,  in  the  city  of  Chicago,  and 
by  the  editor  and  proprietor  of  the  Chicago  Tribune,  to  permit  to  be  said, 
unrebuked,  in  his  paper :  "When  a  tramp" — an  unemployed  and  starving  la- 
boring man — "asks  you  for  bread  put  strychnine  or  arsenic  on  it  and  he  will 
not  trouble  you  any  more,  and  others  will  keep  out  of  the  neighborhood." 
I  suppose,  your  honor,  this  was  said  by  a  law-and-order  pharisee. 

This  verdict,  as  it  now  stands,  proclaims  to  the  world  that  he  who 
throws  a  bomb  and  kills  a  score  of  people  is  safe,  while  he  who  speaks  or 
writes  or  works  to  organize  labor  and  peaceably  remove — because  I  deny  the 
charge  of  any  organization  to  attack  anybody;  the  proof  does  not  show  it. 
nor  sustain  it,  nor  maintain  it — to  peaceably  remove  the  cause  of  the  peo- 
ple's discor.tent  is  in  danger  of  dungeons  and  of  the  scaffold. 

Every  man  called  upon  to  act  upon  the  jury,  swore  that  he  was  an  enemy 
to  the  labor  movement,  was  prejudiced  against  the  idea  of  Socialism  or  free 
labor.  Not  satisfied  with  such  a  jury,  the  enemies  of  free  rights  resorted 
to  perjury  and  other  inhuman  acts  to  bring  about  conviction.  A  few  days 
ago,  in  an  interview  in  the  New  York  World  and  copied  in  the  Chicago  pa- 
pers, Mayor  Harrison  said :  "Right  here  I  would  like  to  say  there  has  been 
the  heartiest  co-operation  between  Mr.  Grinnell  and  myself  from  first  to 
last,  for  without  me  he  would  never  have  been  able  to  get  certain  evidence 
to  obtain  which  I  did  that  which,  if  it  had  been  done  in  the  city  of  London, 
would  upset  the  throne  of  Victoria;  that  which  could  be  done  in  no  mon- 
archical country  with  safety  was  done  here;  because  in  full  sympathy  with 
the  people  as  a  servant  of  the  people  I  did  precisely  what  I  knew  the  peo- 
ple wanted  done  and  would  sustain,  something  which,  if  wrong,  they  could 
easily  rectify."  Now,  your  honor,  there  were  wrongs  done  here.  The  mayor 
says  so.  You  can  rectify  them.  Suspend  your  sentence.  Give  us  a  chance 
in  a  new  trial.  Now,  here  is  the  officer  highest  in  the  city,  who  frankly 
admits  lhat  he  employed  unlawful  means  in  order  to  convict  us,  because  the 
people  wanted  him  to  do  it.  Has  this  court,  has  the  State's  attorney  and 
the  police  done  the  same  thing  in  order  to  convict  us?  Mayor  Harrison  re- 
fers to  the  arrest  of  persons,  the  seizure  of  property,  the  searches  of  homes 
and  places  of  business  without  warrant,  and  in  admitted  disregard  of  con- 
stitutional and  legal  guarantees  of  personal  liberty  and  right,  which  was 
done  by  the  city  police  immediately  after  the  meeting  of  May  4,  1886.  As 
proof  of  what  he  said,  there  followed  that  night  in  this  city  an  era  of  offi- 
cial lawlessness  in  these  respects,  which  according  to  Mayor  Harrison,  would 
not  have  been  tolerated  in  any  other  civilized  country  in  the  world,  and 
which  if  done  in  the  city  of  London  would  have  upset  the  throne  of  Victoria, 
and  which  the  mayor  said  could  not  have  been  done  in  any  monarchical 
country  with  safety.  The  mayor's  confession  is  charmingly  frank,  and  is 
significant.  Is  it  then  true  that  in  this  land,  which  boasts  of  its  liberty, 
private  right  can  be  more  safely  disregarded  in  obedience  to  public  clamor 
than  in  any  o^her  civilized  country?  Is  it  true  that  the  ruling,  the  moneyed 
class  can  set  aside  the  law  with  impunity?  Is  it  true  that  we  are  in  an  era 
when  only  property  is  sacred,  and  not  the  liberty  or  right  of  the  common 
citizen ;  when  the  poor  man  may  be  arrested,  or  a  hated  minority  hung  with 
impunity,  but  to  touch  the  institution  of  property  is  sacrilege?  Is  it  true 
that  the  processes  which  resulted  in  this  verdict  were  as  illegal  as  those 
original  preceedings  against  us  were  high-handed,  unauthorized,  and  uncon- 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  117 

stitutional,  as  confessed  by  the  mayor?  Is  it  true  that  the  verdict  itself  is 
the  result  of  the  same  public  sentiment  which  sustained  the  unauthorized, 
unlawful  conduct  spoken  of  by  Mayor  Harrison?  Can  these  things  be  true? 
See  the  methods  employed  to  cook  up  testimony  against  us.  On  the  22nd  day 
of  August,  1886,  the  day  following  the  verdict,  at  the  conclusion  of  the  trial, 
Captain  Michael  Schaack,  who  is  credited  with  manipulating  the  evidence 
against  us,  made  a  statement  which  was  sent  out  by  the  Associated  Press  as 
follows :  He  was  asked  if  the  police  were  now  through  with  their  labors. 
"Through,"  said  he,  "why,  they  have  barely  commenced.  We  mean  to  have 
others  who  are  liable  to  the  same  charge  indicted.  I  tell  you  the  Anarchist 
business  in  Chicago  is  only  commenced  and  before  it  is  through  we  will  have 
them  all  in  jail,  hanged  or  driven  out  of  the  city."  "Did  you  place  any  men 
under  arrest  yesterday?"  "That  I  do  not  wish  to  state."  "The  report  is 
made  that  there  are  warrants  out  for  a  large  number  of  persons."  "If  you 
think  a  moment  you  will  see  how  foolish  the  idea  would  be.  We  have  no 
room  for  a  large  number  of  persons  in  the  jail;  and  it  would  be  a  needless 
expense  to  arrest  many  at  once.  We  can  get  them  as  fast  as  we  want  them. 
We  do  not  need  to  arrest  them  now.  They  may  try  to  leave  the  city.  Time 
enough  to  ar-est  them  when  they  do."  "Will  any  women  be  arrested?" 
"Why  not?  Some  of  them  are  a  mighty  sight  worse  than  the  men."  "Do 
you  think,"  said  th  j  captain,  continuing,  "that  if  I  had  told  the  newspapers 
what  I  was  doing  when  the  Anarchist  trial  was  going  on  that  the  jury  would 
have  brought  in  the  verdict  of  yesterday?  No,  sir,  a  thousand  time,  no! 
Every  prisoner  would  have  gone  free.  Every  reporter  who  came  to  me  got 
nothing.  I  was  making  up  the  evidence,  piece  by  piece,  little  by  little,  put- 
ting it  where  it  belonged.  If  I  had  told  all  I  knew  as  fait  as  I  got  the  points 
the  defense  would  have  known  what  evidence  was  lo  be  brought  against 
them,  and  would  have  been  prepared  to  meet  it." 

Now,  your  honor,  it  was  claimed  throughout  this  trial — the  State's  at- 
torney claimed  throughout  the  trial  that  he  relied  confidently  on  a  verdict  of 
guilty.  They  maintained  that  there  was  no  doubt  about  it.  I  wish  to  call 
your  attention  to  the  declaration  of  Schaack :  "No,  sir,  a  thousand  times,  no ! 
Every  prisoner  would  have  gone  free  had  I  told  all  I  knew  as  fast  as  I  got 
the  points.  The  defense  would  have  known  what  evidence  was  to  be  brought 
against  them,  and  would  be  prepared  to  meet  it."  This  is  equivalent  to  a 
declaration  that  if  the  accused  persons  had  known  what  evidence  was  to  be 
brought  against  them  they  would  have  brought  evidence  that  would  have 
been  sufficient  to  acquit  them  "a  thousand  times"  over.  Here,  then,  is  an 
explicit  confession  that  we  were  condemned  to  death  by  evidence  that  was 
kept  secret  from  both  us  and  the  public,  and  finally  sprung  upon  us  at  the 
trial.  See  how  Gilmer  was  sprung  upon  us.  The  district  attorney,  when 
he  opened  his  case,  said  that  he  had  nothing  to  conceal;  he  was  going  to  be 
fair,  and  square,  and  honest  about  the  thing;  going  to  tell  us  what  he  was 
going  to  prove,  and  in  the  middle  of  the  trial  he  brings  up  this  man  Gilmer, 
a  wholly  unexpected  thing  to  us,  and  that  was  the  hair  upon  which  hung  the 
thread  which  connected  us  with  Mathias  Degan,  and  the  instrumentality  by 
which  the  verdict  was  brought  about.  The  State's  attorney  said  he  was  not 
going  to  conceal  anything  and  then  concealed  the  very  thing  that  was  ma- 
terial. 

Now,  your  honor,  this  confession  that  certain  testimony  was  sprung  up- 
on us  at  the  trial,  this  Gilmer  matter,  for  instance,  when  no  earthly  oppor- 
tunity was  given  us  to  meet  it,  and  Captain  Schaack's  admission,  that  we 
would  have  been  acquitted  a  thousand  times  over,  if  we  had  known  this  evi- 
dence and  then  been  permitted  to  contradict  it  and  explain  it;  this  confession, 
says  Boston  Liberty,  commenting  upon  this  infamous  proceeding,  is  equiv- 
alent to  a  confession  that  we  were  innocent  and  that  Captain  Schaack  knew 
we  were  innocent,  or  what  is  the  same  thing,  that  he  knew  that  there  was 
evidence  that  would  have  acquitted  us  a  thousand  times  over  if  we  had  been 


118  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS 

allowed  to  produce  it;  but  he  glories  in  the  fact  that  he  was  too  smart  for 
us;  that  by  keeping  this  evidence  secret  from  us  and  the  public  he  was  en- 
abled to  bring  us  into  the  trap ;  a  trap,  your  honor,  a  trap  which  he  and  one 
other  man — I  suppose  he  refers  to  the  State's  attorney — had  prepared  for  us, 
and  thus  secured  our  conviction. 

Now,  if  this  is  not  a  confession  that  Captain  Schaack  and  one  other 
man,  an  accomplice,  set  themselves  deliberately  to  work  to  procure  the  ju- 
dicial murder  of  seven  innocent  men,  men  whom  they  declare  themselves  to 
be  innocent  men,  known  by  him  and  his  accomplice  to  be  innocent,  then 
what  is  it?  Plainly,  it  is  nothing  else.  Schaack's  confession  that  our  evi- 
dence was  such  that,  if  permitted  to  be  introduced  it  would  have  acquitted 
us  a  thousand  times  over,  is  equivalent  to  a  confession  that  it  is  true,  and 
that  to  procure  our  conviction  by  the  suppression  of  this  evidence  was  to 
procure  the  judicial  murder  of  innocent  men.  And  this  work,  says  Captain 
Schaack,  is  to  go  on  until  he  has  all  the  Anarchists  in  jail,  hung,  or  driven 
out  of  the  city. 

Your  honor,  I  would  like  to  make  a  remark  right  here.  What  stronger 
evidence  can  be  required  to  prove  the  infamous  character  of  what  are  called 
our  criminal  courts?  Evidently,  the  courts  are  criminal,  whether  the  persons 
they  convict  are  criminal  or  not.  Under  such  a  condition  of  things  as  this, 
manifestly,  a  trial  can  have  no  color  of  justice  or  reason  or  be  anything  else 
than  a  conspiracy  to  convict  a  man,  whether  he  be  innocent  or  guilty,  unless 
he  is  permitted  to  know  what  it  is  that  they  propose  to  prove  upon  him.  This 
would  be  just,  but  justice  and  law  are  quite  different  things. 

Now,  as  a  part  of  this  foul  conspiracy  the  district  attorney  sprung  his 
witness,  Gilmer,  upon  us  when  it  was  too  late  for  us  to  prove  him  to  be  a 
suborned,  perjured  liar,  and  the  confession  of  this  man  Schaack  is  one  that 
concerns  the  American  people.  They  are  bound  to  take  notice  of  it.  This 
trial,  your  honor,  is  not  simply  the  trial  and  condemnation  of  seven  Anar- 
chists, but  it  is  the  trial  of  the  government  of  the  State  of  Illinois,  as  rep- 
resented by  the  gentlemen  in  this  prosecution,  and  the  government  of  the 
United  States  itself.  The  oppressions  of  which  we  complain  are  such  as  the 
government  of  the  United  States  is  responsible  for,  and  such  as  many  mil- 
lions of  people,  in  fact,  nearly  all  the  people  in  the  United  States,  are  crying 
out  against.  You  need  not  think  that  we  stand  alone.  Some  are  crying  out 
in  more  desperate  tones  than  others,  but  all  in  tones  that  it  will  not  do  for 
any  government,  much  less  a  government — a  pretended  government — of  the 
people — to  disregard. 

Now,  in  this  state  of  things  a  murder  is  committed  by  some  one.  Not 
by  us,  nor  by  any  of  us  but  by  some  one  as  yet  unknown.  We  are  confessed 
by  the  chief  agent  in  procuring  our  conviction  to  be  innocent,  and  have  had 
abundant  proof  of  our  innocence,  or  if  we  had  been  permitted  to  do  so  we 
could  have  proved  ourselves  innocent  "a  thousand  times  over,"  says  Captain 
Schaack.  But  the  government  which,  in  the  opinion  of  the  despairing  mil- 
lions, whose  woes  and  whose  miseries  we  voice  here  today — the  government 
is  responsible  for  their  wrongs,  but  the  government  does  not  brook  any  for- 
cible resistance  by  even  so  much  as  a  single  man.  It  regards  this  single 
man  as  a  torch  that  may  explode  vast  numbers  of  others.  It,  therefore,  de- 
mands not  only  a  victim,  but  victims.  Victims  they  must  have,  whether  they 
be  innocent  or  whether  they  be  guilty.  The  innocent  will  answer  for  exam- 
ples as  well  as  the  guilty.  "Away  with  them !  Victims  are  what  we  want," 
say  monopoly  and  corporations.  So,  being  unable  to  discover  the  guilty  man, 
the  machinery  is  set  to  work  to  convict  seven  innocent  men  in  his  stead. 

Your  honor,  there  has  been  a  great  deal  said  in  the  trial  of  this  case 
about  the  "Board  of  Trade  demonstration,"  and  the  red  and  black  flags. 

In  your  refusal  to  grant  us  a  new  trial  you  allege  as  one  of  the  reasons 
why  Oscar  Neebe  should  be  sent  to  the  penitentiary  for  fifteen  years  that  he 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  119 

presided  at  mass  meetings  of  workingmen  and  organized  several  Trades 
Unions.  You  say: 

"As  to  Neebe's  part,  there  is  the  evidence  of  witnesses  that  he  presided 
at  meetings  called  by  the  class  of  people  from  whom  this  combination  was 
drawn,  and  that  he  called  meetings  of  the  people  who  were  engaged  in  the 
movement.  There  is  evidence  that  he  marched  in  the  Board  of  Trade  proces- 
sion, the  object  of  which  was  said  to  be  the  demolition  of  that  building." 

Now,  sir,  do  you  hold  it  to  be  a  crime  for  a  man  to  organize  the  work- 
ing people  to  defend  themselves  against  "rifle  diet,  police  clubs,  strychnine," 
etc.,  or  to  preside  at  mass  mettings  of  workingmen?  You  say  that  the  ob- 
ject of  the  Board  of  Trade  demonstration  was  "the  demolition  of  the  build- 
ing." Who  told  you  so?  Where  did  you  get  your  information?  There  is  no 
evidence  before  this  court  to  that  effect.  Not  a  particle.  You  say  that  our 
purpose  was  "to  sack  the  Board  of  Trade."  Ridiculous !  Where  did  your 
honor  get  such  an  idea  from?  There  is  no  testimony  here  to  that  effect. 
What  right  has  your  honor  to  assume  what  our  motives  were  to  charge  us 
with  intentions  contrary  to  the  proof?  Now,  sir,  I  deny  it.  It  is  not  true. 

Your  honor,  you  say,  in  overruling  our  motion  for  a  new  trial,  that  our 
purpose  was  "the  demolition  of  the  building,"  to  "sack  it."  Where  is  the 
proof?  The  article  I  have  just  read  giving  an  account  of  the  demonstration 
says  it  was  intended  as  a  protest  against  the  practices  of  these  monopolists; 
that  was  all.  It  was  intended  as  a  manifestation  of  the  working  people's  dis- 
content with  the  existing  order  of  things;  a  protest  against  the  practices  of 
the  class  which  the  Board  of  Trade  represents.  Now,  sir,  is  this  the  kind 
of  testimony  upon  which  you  intend  to  deprive  us  of  our  lives  and  liberty? 
Is  this  the  great  crime  for  which  we  must  suffer  death?  Because  we  have 
held  such  meetings,  and  made  such  speeches,  you  claim  that  we  are  responsi- 
ble for  the  action  of  the  person  who  threw  the  bomb  at  the  Haymarket.  If 
this  is  law,  then  every  dissatisfied  workingman  and  woman  in  America  could 
be  convicted  for  the  same  reason. 

Your  honor,  this  was  a  class  verdict.  I  will  admit  one  thing:  I  believe 
the  jury  were  to  a  large  extent  imposed  upon.  Now,  when  the  State's  at- 
torney comes  in  and  brings  the  gory  garments  of  the  police,  clotted  with 
blood  and  filled  with  holes,  and  exhibits  these  garments  to  the  jury — no- 
body denies  that  these  men  were  killed — what  was  that  done  for?  To  prove 
that  the  policemen  had  been  killed?  Nobody  denies  that,  what  was  it  done 
for?  It  was  done  to  prejudice  that  jury,  to  inflame  that  jury,  and,  in  the 
language  of  Mr.  Grinnell  when  he  closed  his  speech,  he  says :  "Let  these 
things  steel  your  hearts  against  these  miserable  wretches  and  scoundrels." 

Suppose  this  Indianapolis  man,  sent  by  monopolists,  came  here  and 
threw  the  bomb,  and  these  gory  garments  are  to  be  thrown  around  here  in 
the  court  room  before  the  jury  for  the  purpose  of  steeling  their  hearts  to 
bring  about  the  conviction  of  eight  innocent  men.  I  ask  your  honor — I  ask 
you  fcr  another  trial. 

Lawyer  Ingham  with  clenched  fist,  swollen  neck  and  blood-shot  eyes  ex- 
claimed to  the  jury:  "The  State  of  Illinois  is  strong  enough  to  hang  every 
one  of  these  Anarchists!"  Well,  who  said  it  was  not?  But  who  would  believe 
it  mean  enough  to  do  so  just  because  it  can?  The  burly  brute  rapes  his 
helpless  victim  simply  because  he  is  mean  enough  and  strong  enough  to  do 
so.  The  bourgeoisie  society  is  not  itself,  however,  unless  it  commits  whole- 
sale outrages  upon  the  proletariat  and  afterwards  gloats  over  its  victims. 

The  ballot.  Your  honor,  you  have  heard  of  this  Law  and  Order  League 
in  these  United  States.  It  has  been  organized  in  Chicago  and  called  a  con- 
servators' league  or  association.  It  is  an  organization  of  big  tax-payers,  if 
you  have  heard  of  it,  and  they  come  out  and  openly  declare  that  they  do  not 
intend  to  permit  the  Knights  of  Labor  and  the  workingmen  to  come  into 
power  through  the  ballot  box.  That  is  their  own  declaration,  made  in  the 
papers  here  at  their  meetings,  in  their  reports.  Of  course,  I  don't  know  any- 


120  ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.   PARSONS 

thing  further  about  it.  But  I  want  to  ask  you  this  question,  viz. :  Don't  you 
think  a  man  who  is  not  able  to  control  his  bread — and  you  know  what  I 
mean  by  that — has  a  poor  chance  to  control  his  vote;  not  a  very  good  chance 
to  control  his  vote?  In  other  words,  don't  you  think  those  who  control  the 
industries  of  the  country  can  and  do  control  the  votes  of  that  country? 
Don't  you  think  tha*.  a  man  who  must  sell  his  labor  or  starve  will  sell  his 
vote  when  the  same  alternative  is  presented?  Does  politics  control  wealth 
or  wealth  politics?  Are  the  economically  enslaved  politically  free?  Your 
honor,  political  liberty  without  economic  freedom  is  an  empty  phrase.  The 
wage  slave  is  a  political  freeman ;  yes,  he  is  free  to  choose  from  among 
his  economic  masters  the  one  who  shall  rule  and  govern  him.  A  choice  of 
masters,  that  is  all.  So  this  "Law  and  Order"  League  proposes  to  control 
the  ballots  of  their  wage  slaves. 

Now,  then,  the  Haymarket,  what  of  it?  I  had  been  away  to  Cincinnati. 
I  went  to  Cinicnnati  Saturday  night,  May  1.  I  spoke  there  Sunday  morning 
or  during  the  day,  at  a  great  labor  demonstration,  an  eight  hour  demon- 
stration, a  picnic  of  the  workingmen  at  Cincinnati.  They  sent  for  me  to 
come  down.  I  stayed  there  Sunday.  I  went  to  their  grove  Sunday  night, 
and  I  started  back  to  Chicago  Monday  night,  reached  here  Tuesday  morn- 
ing, May  4,  and  went  home  about  eight  o'clock  and  saw  my  wife.  I  took 
a  nap  on  the  lounge.  About  ten  o'clock  she  woke  me,  then  she  says  to  me, 
"We  had  a  very  interesting  meeting  last  Sunday  of  the  tailor  girls,  the  sew- 
ing girls  of  Chicago,  a  large  mass  meeting.  I  spoke  to  them,  addressed  the 
meeting;  they  were  znxious  to  organize,  and  I  think  we  ought  to  do  something 
to  help  those  sewing  women  to  organize  and  join  the  eight  hour  movement, 
because  they  work  harder  than  anybody;  these  great  tailor  machines  are  very 
hard  to  work."  So  ended  the  conversation.  She  showed  me  the  importance 
of  having  a  meeting  called  at  once  and  doing  something  for  the  eight  hour 
movement  for  the  girls.  Well,  I  went  on  my  way  down  town  and  I  went 
to  Greif's  Hall.  All  the  halls  were  occupied ;  this  was  during  the  eight 
hour  strike.  ^11  the  halls  were  occupied.  A  great  many  meetings  were  being 
held.  I  could  get  a  hall  nowhere  else  and  the  meeting  was  to  be  a  business 
meeting  anyway.  It  was  not  to  be  a  general  meeting,  it  was  merely  to  appropri- 
ate money  and  take  action  and  appoint  a  committee  to  get  hand  bills  and 
get  some  hall  and  so  forth.  That  was  all,  so  it  did  not  require  much ;  any 
ordinary  room,  any  little  room,  anywhere,  would  have  done  for  that,  and  the 
offices  of  the  Arbeiter-Zeitung,  at  107  Fifth  avenue,  suited  that  purpose;  so 
I  announced  it  in  the  News  about  twelve  o'clock,  I  believe,  and  it  was  in 
the  News  in  the  afternoon  of  that  day,  not  stating  what  the  meeting  was 
for,  only  it  was  important  business.  So  at  eight  o'clock  or  about  half-past 
seven  that  night — my  wife  and  Mrs.  Holmes  left  my  home  at  No.  245  West 
Indiana  street,  accompanied  by  my  two  little  babes — you  have  seen  them 
here ;  a  little  girl  of  five  and  a  boy  of  seven ;  you  have  seen  them  in  the 
court  room  often.  It  was  a  nice  evening  and  we  walked  down  town ;  we 
walked  until  we  got  to  Randolpn  and  Halsted  streets — however,  in  the  after- 
noon, late  in  the  afternoon,  at  the  office  of  the  Arbeiter-Zeitung,  I  learned 
that  there  was  going  to  be  a  meeting  at  the  Haymarket.  But  the  meeting 
at  No.  107  Filth  avenue  had  already  been  called,  and  I  could  not  attend  it: 
I  could  not  go  over  there.  At  half-past  seven  I  left  home  with  my  wife, 
Mrs.  Holmes  and  the  children.  We  got  to  Halsted  street.  Two  reporters, 
seeing  me,  thought  there  was  a  chance  to  get  an  item  and  came  over  to  me 
— the  Times  man  and  the  Tribune  man ;  I  forget  their  names. 

"Hello,  Parsons,  what  is  the  news?"  says  one. 

"I  don't  know  anything." 

"Going  to  be  a  meeting  here  tonight?" 

"Yes,  I  guess  so." 

"Going  to  speak?" 

"No." 


ADDRESS  OF  ALBERT  R.  PARSONS  121 

"Where  are  you  going?" 

"I  have  another  meeting  on  hand  tonight." 

And  somt  playful  remark  was  made.  I  slapped  one  of  them  on  the 
back.  I  was  quite  well  acquainted  with  the  men  and  we  made  one  or  two 
brief  remarks,  and,  as  they  testified  on  the  stand,  I  got  on  the  car  right  then 
and  there  with  my  wife  and  two  children,  in  company  with  Mrs.  Holmes, 
and  they  saw  that.  I  went  down  to  Fifth  avenue.  When  I  got  down  there 
I  found  four  or  five  other  ladies  there  and  about — well,  probably,  twelve  or 
fifteen  men.  It  was  about  8:30  o'clock  when  we  opened — I  guess  is  was. 
We  stayed  there  about  half  an  hour.  We  settled  the  business.  About  the 
time  we  were  through  with  it  a  committee  came  from  the  Hay  market,  say- 
ing: "Nobody  is  over  there  but  Spies.  There  is  an  awful  big  crowd,  3,000 
or  4,000  people.  For  God's  sake  send  somebody  over.  Come  over,  Parsons ; 
come  over,  Fielden."  Well,  we  went  there.  The  meeting  was  adjourned  and 
we  all  went  over  there  together — all  of  us;  my  wife,  Mrs.  Holmes,  two 
other  ladies,  and  my  two  little  children,  went  over  to  the  Haymarket  meet- 
ing. And  these  ladies  sat  ten  feet  behind  the  wagon  from  which  I  spoke. 

Your  honor,  is  it  possible  that  a  man  would  go  into  the  dynamite-bomb 
business  undei  those  conditions  and  those  circumstances?  It  is  incredible. 
It  is  beyond  human  nature  to  believe  such  a  thing  possible,  absolutely. 

Well,  the  next  day — I  related  on  the  witness  stand  all  that  I  saw — the 
next  day  I  saw  that  they  were  dragging  these  men  to  prison,  treating  them 
in  a  shameful  manner.  I  left  the  city.  I  went  to  Geneva,  111.,  for  a  couple 
of  days ;  stayed  there  with  my  friend  Holmes.  Then  I  went  to  Elgin.  Ilf., ; 
stayed  there  a  couple  of  days.  Then  I  left  there  and  went  to  Waukesha, 
Wis.,  where  I  obtained  employment  as  a  carpenter  and  afterward  as  a  painter, 
and  remained  for  over  seven  weeks  in  Waukesha.  My  health  was  debilitated, 
and  I  went  to  the  f.prings  when  I  was  thirsty.  The  house  I  was  working 
on  was  only  a  half  a  block  from  the  springs,  and  I  needed  the  recreation  and 
the  rest,  the  pure  air,  and  the  water  besides.  When  I  saw  the  day  fixed 
for  the  opening  of  this  trial,  knowing  I  was  an  innocent  man,  and  also  feeling 
that  it  was  mv  duty  to  come  forward^  and  share  whatever  fate  had  in  store 
for  my  comrades,  and  also  to  stand,  if  need  be,  on  the  scaffold,  and  vindi- 
cate the  rights  of  labor,  the  cause  of  liberty,  and  the  relief  of  the  oppressed, 
I  returned.  How  did  I  return?  It  is  interesting,  but  it  will  take  time  to 
relate  it,  and  I  will  not  state  it.  I  ran  the^  gauntlet.  I  went  from  Waukesha 
to  Milwaukee.  I  took  the  St.  Paul  train* in  the  morning  at  the  Milwaukee 
depot  and  came  to  Chicago;  arrived  here  at  8:30,  I  suppose,  in  the  morn- 
ing. Went  to  the  house  of  my  friend,  Mrs.  Ames,  on  Morgan  street.  Sent 
for  my  wife  and  had  a  talk  with  her.  I  sent  word  to  Captain  Black  that  I 
was  here  and  prepared  to  surrender.  He  sent  word  back  to  me  that  he 
was  ready  to  receive  me.  I  met  him  at  the  threshold  of  this  building  and 
we  came  up  here  together.  I  stood  in  the  presence  of  this  court.  I  have 
nothing,  not  even  now,  to  regret. 


ADDRESS  OF  AUGUST  SPIES 

YOUR  HONOR:  In  addressing  this  court  I  speak  as  the  representative  of 
one  class  to  the  representative  of  another.  I  will  begin  with  the  words 
utteied  five  hundred  years  ago  on  a  similar  occasion,  by  the  Venetian  Doge 
Faheri,  who,  addressing  the  court,  said:  "My  defense  is  your  accusation;  the 
causes  of  my  alleged  crime  your  history!"  I  have  been  indicted  on  a  charge 
of  murder,  as  an  accomplice  or  accessory.  Upon  this  indictment  I  have  been 
convicted.  There  was  no  evidence  produced  by  the  State  to  show  or  even 
indicate  that  I  had  any  knowledge  of  the  man  who  threw  the  bomb,  or  that 
I  myself  had  anything  to  do  with  the  throwing  of  the  missile,  unless,  of 
couise,  you  weigh  the  testimony  of  the  accomplices  of  the  State's  attorney 
and  Bonfield,  the  testimony  of  Thompson  and  Gilmer,  by  the  price  they  were 
paid  for  it.  If  there  was  no  evidence  to  show  that  I  was  legally  responsible 
for  the  deed,  then  my  conviction  and  the  execution  of  the  sentence  is  nothing 
less  than  willful,  malicious  and  deliberate  murder,  as  foul  a  murder  as  may 
be  found  in  the  annals  of  religious,  political,  or  any  other  sort  of  persecution. 
There  have  been  many  judicial  murders  committed  where  the  representatives 
of.  the  State  were  acting  in  good  faith,  believing  their  victims  to  be  guilty  of 
the  charge  accused  of.  In  this  case  the  representatives  of  the  State  cannot 
shield  themselves  with  a  similar  excuse.  For  they  themselves  have  fabricated 
most  of  the  testimony  which  was  used  as  a  pretense  to  convict  us ;  to  convict 
us  by  a  jury  picked  out  to  convict!  Before  this  court,  and  before  the  public, 
which  is  supposed  to  be  the  State,  I  charge  the  State's  attorney  and  Bonfield 
with  the  heinous  conspiracy  to  commit  murder. 

I  will  state  a  little  incident  which  may  throw  light  upon  this  charge.  On 
the  evening  on  which  the  Praetorian  Guards  of  the  Citizens'  Association,  the 
Bankers'  Association,  the  Association  of  the  Board  of  Trade  men,  and  the 
railroad  princes,  attacked  the  meeting  of  workingmen  on  the  Haymarket, 
with  murderous  intent — on  that  evening,  about  eight  o'clock,  I  met  a  young 
man,  Legner  by  name,  who  is  a  member  of  the  Aurora  Turn-Verein.  He 
accompanied  me,  and  never  left  me  on  that  evening  until  I  jumped  from  the 
wagon,  a  few  seconds  before  the  explosion  occurred.  He  knew  that  I  had 
not  seen  Schwab  that  evening.  He  knew  that  I  had  no  such  conversation 
with  anybody  as  Mr.  Marshall  Field's  protege,  Thompson,  testified  to.  He 
knew  that  I  did  not  jump  from  the  wagon  to  strike  the  match  and  hand  it  to 
the  man  who  threw  the  bomb.  He  is  not  a  Socialist.  Why  did  we  not  bring 
him  on  the  stand?  Because  the  honorable  representatives  of  the  State, 
Grinnell  and  Bonfield,  spirited  him  away.  These  honorable  gentlemen  knew 
everything  about  Legner.  They  knew  that  his  testimony  would  prove  the 
perjury  of  Thompson  and  Gilmer  beyond  any  reasonable  doubt.  Legner's 
name  was  on  the  list  of  witnesses  for  the  State.  He  was  not  called,  however, 
for  obvious  reasons.  Aye,  he  stated  to  a  number  of  friends  that  he  had  been 
offered  $500  if  he  would  leave  the  city,  and  threatened  with  direful  things  if 
he  remained  here  and  appeared  as  a  witness  for  the  defense.  He  replied 
that  he  could  neither  be  bought  nor  bulldozed  to  serve  such  a  damnable  and 
dastardly  plot.  When  we  wanted  Legner,  he  could  not  be  found ;  Mr.  Grin- 
nell said — and  Mr.  Grinnell  is  an  honorable  man ! — that  he  had  himself  been 
searching  for  the  young  man,  but  had  not  been  able  to  find  him.  About  three 
weeks  later  I  learned  that  the  very  same  young  man  had  been  kidnaped  and 
taken  to  Buffalo,  N.  Y.,  by  two  of  the  illustrious  guardians  of  "law  and 
order,"  two  Chicago  detectives.  Let  Mr.  Grinnell,  let  the  Citizens'  Associa- 
tion, his  employer,  let  them  answer  for  this !  And  let  the  public  sit  in  judg- 
ment upon  the  would-be  assassins ! 


12  ADDRESS  OF  AUGUST  SPIES 

No,  I  repeat,  the  prosecution  has  not  established  our  legal  guilt,  not- 
withstanding the  purchased  and  perjured  testimony  of  some,  and  notwith- 
standing the  originality  of  the  proceedings  of  this  trial.  And  as  long  as 
this  has  not  been  done,  and  you  pronounce  upon  us  the  sentence  of  an  ap- 
pointed vigilance  committee,  acting  as  a  jury,  I  say,  you,  the  alleged  repre- 
sentatives and  high  priests  of  "law  and  order,"  are  the  real  and  only  law 
breakers,  and  in  this  case  to  the  extent  of  murder.  It  is  well  that  the  peo- 
ple know  this.  And  when  I  speak  of  the  people  I  don't  mean  the  few  co- 
conspirators  of  Grinnell,  the  noble  politicians  who  thrive  upon  the  misery 
of  the  multitudes.  These  drones  may  constitute  the  State,  they  may  control 
the  State,  they  may  have  their  Grinnells,  their  Bonfields  and  other  hirelings ! 
No,  when  I  speak  of  the  people  I  speak  of  the  great  mass  of  human  bees, 
the  working  people,  who  unfortunately  are  not  yet  conscious  of  the  rascali- 
ties that  are  perpetrated  in  the  "name  of  the  people," — in  their  name. 

The  contemplated  murder  of  eight  men,  whose  only  crime  is  that  they 
have  dared  to  speak  the  truth,  may  open  the  eyes  of  these  suffering  millions ; 
may  wake  them  up.  Indeed,  I  have  noticed  that  our  conviction  has  worked 
miracles  in  this  direction  already.  The  class  that  clamors  for  our  lives,  the 
good,  devout  Christians,  have  attempted  in  every  way,  through  their  news- 
papers and  otherwise,  to  conceal  the  true  and  only  issue  in  this  case.  By 
simply  designating  the  defendants  as  Anarchists,  and  picturing  them  as  a 
newly  discovered  tribe  or  species  of  cannibals,  and  by  inventing  shocking 
and  horrifying  stories  of  dark  conspiracies  said  to  be  planned  by  them — 
these  good  Christians  zealously  sought  to  keep  the  naked  fact  from  the 
working  people  and  other  righteous  parties,  namely :  That  on  the  evening  of 
May  4,  two  hundred  armed  men,  under  the  command  of  a  notorious  ruffian, 
attacked  a  meeting  of  peaceable  citizens!  With  what  intention?  With  the 
intention  of  murdering  them,  or  as  many  of  them  as  they  could.  I  refer  to 
the  testimony  given  by  two  of  our  witnesses.  The  wage  workers  of  this  city 
began  to  object  to  being  fleeced  too  much — they  began  to  say  some  very  true 
things,  but  they  were  highly  disagreeable  to  our  Patrician  class ;  they  put 
forth — well,  some  very  modest  demands.  They  thought  eight  hours  hard 
toil  a  day  for  scarcely  two  hours'  pay  was  enough.  This  "lawless  rabble" 
had  to  be  silenced !  The  only  way  to  silence  them  was  to  frighten  them, 
and  murder  those  whom  they  looked  up  to  as  their  leaders.  Yes,  these 
"foreign  dogs"  had  to  be  taught  a  lesson,  so  that  they  might  never  again 
interfere  with  the  high-handed  exploitation  of  their  benevolent  and  Chris- 
tian masters.  Bonfield,  the  man  who  would  bring  a  blush  of  shame  to  the 
managers  of  the  St.  Bartholomew  night — Bonfield,  the  illustrious  gentleman 
with  a  visage  that  would  have  done  excellent  service  to  Dore  in  portraying 
Dante's  fiends  of  hell — Bonfield  was  the  man  best  fitted  to  consummate  the 
conspiracy  of  the  Citizens'  Association,  of  our  Patricians.  If  I  had  thrown 
that  bomb,  or  had  caused  it  to  be  thrown,  or  had  known  of  it,  I  would  not 
hesitate  a  moment  to  say  so.  It  is  true  that  a  number  of  lives  were  lost — 
many  were  wounded.  But  hundreds  of  lives  were  thereby  saved !  But  for 
that  bomb,  there  would  have  been  a  hundred  widows  and  hundreds  of 
orphans  where  now  there  are  a  few.  These  facts  have  been  carefully  sup- 
pressed, and  we  were  accused  and  convicted  of  conspiracy  by  the  real  con- 
spirators and  their  agents.  This,  your  honor,  is  one  reason  why  sentence 
should  not  be  passed  by  a  court  of  justice — if  that  name  has  any  significance 
at  all. 

"But,"  says  the  State,  "you  have  published  articles  on  the  manufacture 
of  dynamite  and  bombs."  Show  me  a  daily  paper  in  this  city  that  has  not 
published  similar  articles!  I  remember  very  distinctly  a  long  article  in  the 
Chicago  Tribune  of  February  23,  1885.  The  paper  contained  a  description 
and  drawings  of  different  kinds  of  infernal  machines  and  bombs.  I  remem- 
ber this  one  especially,  because  I  bought  the  paper  on  a  railroad  train,  and 


ADDRESS  OF  AUGUST  SPIES  13 

had  ample  time  to  read  it.  But  since  that  time  the  Times  has  often  pub- 
lished similar  articles  on  the  subject,  and  some  of  the  dynamite  articles  found 
in  the  Arbeiter-Zeitung  were  translated  articles  from  the  Times,  written  by 
Generals  Molineux  and  Fitz  John  Porter,  in  which  the  use  of  dynamite 
bombs  against  striking  workingmen  is  advocated  as  the  most  effective  weap- 
on against  them.  May  I  learn  why  the  editors  of  these  papers  have  not 
been  indicted  and  convicted  for  murder?  Is  it  because  they  have  advocated 
the  use  of  this  destructive  agent  only  against  the  "common  rabble?"  I  seek 
information.  Why  was  Mr.  Stone  of  the  News  not  made  a  defendant  in 
this  case?  In  his  possession  was  found  a  bomb.  Besides  that  Mr.  Stone 
published  an  article  in  January  which  gave  full  information  regarding  the 
manufacture  of  bombs.  Upon  this  information  any  man  could  prepare  a 
bomb  ready  for  use  at  the  expense  of  not  more  than  ten  cents.  The  News 
probably  has  ten  times  the  circulation  of  the  Arbeiter-Zeitung.  Is  it  not  like- 
ly that  the  bomb  used  on  May  4  was  one  made  after  the  News'  pattern? 
As  long  as  these  men  are  not  charged  with  murder  and  convicted,  I  insist, 
your  honor,  that  such  discrimination  in  favor  of  capital  is  incompatible  with 
justice,  and  sentence  should  therefore  not  be  passed. 

Grinnell's  main  argument  against  the  defendants  was — "They  were  for- 
eigners; they  were  not  citizens."  I  cannot  speak  for  the  others.  I  will  only 
speak  for  myself.  I  have  been  a  resident  of  this  State  fully  as  long  as  Grin- 
nell,  and  probably  have  been  as  good  a  citizen — at  least,  I  should  not  wish 
to  be  compared  with  him.  Grinnell  has  incessantly  appealed  to  the  patriot- 
ism of  the  jury.  To  that  I  reply  in  the  language  of  Johnson,  the  English 
litterateur,  "an  appeal  to  patriotism  is  the  last  resort  of  a  scoundrel." 

My  efforts  in  behalf  of  the  disinherited  and  disfranchised  millions,  my 
agitation  in  this  direction,  the  popularization  of  economic  teachings — in  short, 
the  education  of  the  wage  workers,  is  declared  "a  conspiracy  against  so- 
ciety." The  word  "society"  is  here  wisely  substituted  for  "the  State,"  as 
represented  by  the  Patricians  of  today.  It  has  always  been  the  opinion  of 
the  ruling  classes  that  the  people  must  be  kept  in  ignorance,  for  they  lose 
their  servility,  their  modesty  and  their  obedience  to  the  powers  that  be,  as 
their  intelligence  increases.  The  education  of  a  black  slave  a  quarter  of  a 
century  ago  was  a  criminal  offense.  Why?  Because  the  intelligent  slave 
would  throw  off  his  shackles  at  whatever  cost.  Why  is  the  education  of  the 
working  people  of  today  looked  upon  by  a  certain  class  as  an  offense  against 
the  State?  For  the  same  reason!  The  State,  however,  wisely  avoided  this 
point  in  the  prosecution  of  this  case.  From  their  testimony  one  is  forced 
to  conclude  that  we  had,  in  our  speeches  and  publications,  preached  nothing 
else  but  destruction  and  dynamite.  The  court  has  this  morning  stated  that 
there  is  no  case  in  history  like  this.  I  have  noticed,  during  this  trial,  that 
the  gentlemen  of  the  legal  profession  are  not  well  versed  in  history.  In  all 
historical  cases  of  this  kind  truth  had  to  be  perverted  by  the  priests  of  the 
established  power  that  was  nearing  its  end. 

What  have  we  said  in  our  speeches  and  publications? 

We  have  interpreted  to  the  people  their  conditions  and  relations  in  so- 
ciety. We  have  explained  to  them  the  different  social  phenomena  and  the 
social  laws  and  circumstances  under  which  they  occur.  We  have,  by  way 
of  scientific  investigation,  incontrovertibly  proved  and  brought  to  their  knowl- 
edge that  the  system  of  wages  is  the  root  of  the  present  social  iniquities — 
iniquities  so  monstrous  that  they  cry  to  heaven.  We  have  further  said 
that  the  wage  system,  as  a  specific  form  of  social  development,  would,  by 
the  necessity  of  logic,  have  to  give  way  to  higher  forms  of  civilization ; 
that  the  wage  system  must  furnish  the  foundation  for  a  social  system  of 
co-operation — that  is,  Socialism.  That  whether  this  or  that  theory,  this  or 
that  scheme  regarding  future  arrangements  were  accepted  was  not  a  mat- 
ter of  choice,  but  one  of  historical  necessity,  and  that  to  us  the  tendency 


14  ADDRESS   OF   AUGUST   SPIES 

of  progress  seemed  to  be  Anarchism — that  is,  a  free  society  without  kings 
or  classes — a  society  of  sovereigns  in  which  liberty  and  economic  equality 
of  all  would  furnish  an  unshakable  equilibrium  as  a  foundation  for  natural 
order. 

It  is  not  likely  that  the  honorable  Bonfield  and  Grinnell  can  conceive  of 
a  social  order  not  held  intact  by  the  policeman's  club  and  pistol,  nor  of  a  free 
society  without  prisons,  gallows,  and  State's  attorneys.  In  such  a  society 
they  probably  fail  to  find  a  place  for  themselves.  And  is  this  the  reason  why 
Anarchism  is  such  a  "pernicious  and  damnable  doctrine"? 

Grinnell  has  intimated  to  us  that  Anarchism  was  on  trial.  The  theory 
of  Anarchism  belongs  to  the  realm  of  speculative  philosophy.  There  was  not 
a  syllable  said  about  Anarchism  at  the  Haymarket  meeting;  At  that  meeting 
the  very  popular  theme  of  reducing  the  hours  of  toil  was  discussed.  But, 
"Anarchism  is  on  trial !"  foams  Air.  Grinnell.  If  that  is  the  case,  your  honor, 
very  well;  you  ma>  sentence  me,  for  I  am  an  Anarchist.  I  believe  with 
Buckle,  with  Paine,  Jefferson,  Emerson  and  Spencer,  and  many  other  great 
thinkers  of  this  century,  that  the  state  of  castes  and  classes — the  state  where 
one  class  dominates  over  and  lives  upon  the  labor  of  another  class,  and  calls 
this  order — yes,  I  believe  that  this  barbaric  form  of  social  organization,  with 
its  legalized  plunder  and  murder,  is  doomed  to  die,  and  make  room  for  a 
free  society,  voluntary  association,  or  universal  brotherhood,  if  you  like. 
You  may  pronounce  the  sentence  upon  me,  honorable  judge,  but  let  the  world 
know  that  in  A.  D.  1886,  in  the  State  of  Illinois,  eight  men  were  sentenced 
to  death,  because  they  believed  in  a  better  future;  because  they  had  not  lost 
their  faith  in  the  ultimate  victory  of  liberty  and  justice ! 

"You  have  taught  the  destruction  of  society  and  civilization,"  says  the 
tool  and  agent  of  the  Bankers'  and  Citizens'  Associations,  Grinnell.  That 
man  has  yet  to  learn  what  civilization  is.  It  is  the  old,  old  argument  against 
human  progress.  Read  the  history  of  Greece,  of  Rome;  read  that  of  Venice; 
look  over  the  dark  pages  of  the  church,  and  follow  the  thorny  path  of  sci- 
ence. "No  change !  No  change !  You  would  destroy  society  and  civilization  !" 
has  ever  been  the  cry  of  the  ruling  classes.  They  are  so  comfortably  situated 
under  the  prevailing  system  that  they  naturally  abhor  and  fear  even  the 
slightest  change.  Their  privileges  are  as  dear  to  them  as  life  itself,  and 
every  change  threatens  these  privileges.  But  civilization  is  a  ladder  whose 
steps  are  monuments  of  such  changes !  Without  these  social  changes — all 
brought  about  against  the  will  and  the  force  of  the  ruling  classes — there 
would  be  no  civilization.  As  to  the  destruction  of  society  which  we  have 
been  accused  of  seeking,  sounds  this  not  like  one  of  Aesop's  fables — like  the 
cunning  of  the  fox?  We,  who  have  jeopardized  our  lives  to  save  society 
from  the  fiend — the  fiend  who  has  grasped  her  by  the  throat;  who  sucks  her 
life-blood,  who  devours  her  children — we,  who  would  heal  her  bleeding 
wounds,  who  would  free  her  from  the  fetters  you  have  wrought  around  her; 
from  the  misery  you  have  brought  upon  her — we  her  enemies !  Honorable 
judge,  the  demons  of  hell  will  join  in  the  laughter  this  irony  provokes ! 

"We  have  preached  dynamite !"  Yes,  we  have  predicted  from  the  lessons 
history  teaches,  that  the  ruling  classes  of  today  would  no  more  listen  to 
the  voice  of  reason  than  their  predecessors ;  that  they  would  attempt  by 
brute  force  to  stay  the  wheels  of  progress.  Is  it  a  lie,  or  was  it  the  truth 
we  told?  Are  not  the  large  industries  of  this  once  free  country  already 
conducted  under  the  surveillance  of  the  police,  the  detectives,  the  -mili- 
tary and  the  sheriffs — and  is  this  return  to  militancy  not  developing  from 
day  today?  American  sovereigns — think  of  it — working  like  galley  con- 
victs under  military  guards !  We  have  predicted  this,  and  predict  that 
soon  these  conditions  will  grow  unbearable.  What  then?  The  man- 
date of  the  feudal  lords  of  our  time  is  slavery,  starvation,  and  death ! 
This  has  been  their  program  for  years.  We  have  said  to  the  toil- 


ADDRESS  OF  AUGUST  SPIES  15 

ers,  that  science  had  penetrated  the  mystery  of  nature — that  from  Jove's  head 
once  more  has  sprung  a  Minerva — dynamite!  If  this  declaration  is  synony- 
mous with  murder,  why  not  charge  those  with  the  crime  to  whom  we  owe 
the  invention? 

To  charge  us  with  an  attempt  to  overthrow  the  present  system  on  or 
about  May  4,  by  force,  and  then  establish  Anarchy,  is  too  absurd  a  statement, 
I  think,  even  for  a  political  office  holder  to  make.  If  Grinnell  believed  that 
we  attempted  such  a  thing,  why  did  he  not  have  Dr.  Bluthardt  make  an 
inquiry  as  to  our  sanity?  Only  madmen  could  have  planned  such  a  brilliant 
scheme,  and  mad  people  cannot  be  indicted  or  convicted  of  murder.  If  there 
had  existed  anything  like  a  conspiracy  or  a  pre-arrangement,  does  your  honor 
believe  that  events  would  not  have  taken  a  different  course  than  they  did  on 
that  evening  and  later?  This  "conspiracy"  nonsense  is  based  upon  an  oration 
I  delivered  on  the  anniversary  of  Washington's  birthday  at  Grand  Rapids, 
Mich.,  more  than  a  year  and  a  half  ago.  I  had  been  invited  by  the  Knights 
of  Labor  for  that  purpose.  I  dwelt  upon  the  fact  that  our  country  was  far 
from  being  what  the  great  revolutionists  of  the  last  century  intended  it  to  be. 
I  said  that  those  men,  if  they  lived  today,  would  clean  the  Augean  stables 
with  iron  brooms,  and  that  they,  too,  would  undoubtedly  be  characterized  as 
"wild  Socialists."  It  is  not  unlikely  that  I  said  Washington  would  have  been 
hanged  for  treason  if  the  revolution  had  failed.  Grinnell  made  this  "sacri- 
legious remark"  his  main  arrow  against  me.  Why?  Because  he  intended  to 
inveigh  the  know-nothing  spirit  against  us.  But  who  will  deny  the  correct- 
ness of  the  statement?  That  I  should  have  compared  myself  with  Wash- 
ington, is  a  base  lie.  But  if  I  had,  would  that  be  murder?  I  may  have  told 
that  individual  who  appeared  here  as  a  witness  that  the  workingmen  should 
procure  arms,  as  force  would  in  all  probability  be  the  ultima  ratio  regum; 
and  that  in  Chicago  there  were  so  and  so  many  armed,  but  I  certainly  did 
not  say  that  we  proposed  to  "inaugurate  the  social  revolution."  And  let  me 
say  here :  Revolutions  are  no  more  made  than  earthquakes  and  cyclones. 
Revolutions  are  the  effect  of  certain  causes  and  conditions.  I  have  made 
social  philosophy  a  specific  study  for  more  than  ten  years,  and  I  could  not 
have  given  vent  to  such  nonsense !  I  do  believe,  however,  that  the  revolution 
is  near  at  hand — in  fact,  that  it  is  upon  us.  But  is  the  physician  responsible 
for  the  death  of  the  patient  because  he  foretold  that  death?  If  any  one  is  to 
be  blamed  for  the  coming  revolution  it  is  the  ruling  class  who  steadily  refuses 
to  make  concessions  as  reforms  become  necessary ;  who  maintain  that  they 
can  call  a  halt  to  progress,  and  dictate  a  standstill  to  the  eternal  forces  of 
which  they  themselves  are  but  the  whimsical  creation. 

The  position  generally  taken  in  this  case  is  that  we  are  morally  respon- 
sible for  the  police  riot  on  May  4.  Four  or  five  years  ago  I  sat  in  this  very 
courtroom  as  :i  witness.  The  workingmen  had  been  trying  to  obtain  redress 
in  a  lawful  manner.  They  had  voted  and,  among  others,  had  elected  their 
aldermanic  candidate  from  the  Fourteenth  ward.  But  the  street  car  com- 
pany did  not  like  the  man.  And  two  of  the  three  election  judges  of  one 
precinct,  knowing  this,  took  the  ballot  box  to  their  home  and  "corrected" 
the  election  returns,  so  as  to  cheat  the  constituents  of  the  elected  candidate 
of  their  rightful  representative  and  give  the  representation  to  the  benevolent 
street  car  monopoly.  The  workingmen  spent  $1,500  in  the  prosecution 
of  the  perpetrators  of  this  crime.  The  proof  against  them  was  so  over- 
whelming that  they  confessed  to  having  falsified  the  returns  and  forged 
the  official  documents.  Judge  Gardner,  who  was  presiding  in  this  court, 
acquitted  them,  stating  that  "that  act  had  apparently  not  been  prompted  by 
criminal  intent."  I  will  make  no  comment.  But  when  we  approach  the  field 
of  moral  responsibility,  it  has  an  immense  scope !  Every  man  who  has  in 
the  past  assisted  in  thwarting  the  efforts  of  those  seeking  reform  is  respon- 
sible for  the  existence  of  the  revolutionists  in  this  city  today!  Those,  how- 


16  ADDRESS  OF  AUGUST  SPIES 

ever,  who  have  sought  to  bring  about  reforms  must  be  exempted  from  the 
responsibility — and  to  these  I  belong. 

If  the  verdict  is  based  upon  the  assumption  of  moral  responsibility,  your 
honor,  I  give  this  as  a  reason  why  sentence  should  not  be  passed. 

If  the  opinion  of  the  court  given  this  morning  is  good  law,  then  there 
is  no  person  in  this  country  who  could  not  lawfully  be  hanged.  I  vouch 
that,  upon  the  very  laws  you  have  read,  there  is  no  person  in  this  court 
room  now  who  could  not  be  "fairly,  impartially  and  lawfully"  hanged ! 
Fouche,  Napoleon's  right  bower,  once  said  to  his  master :  "Give  me  a  line 
that  any  one  man  has  ever  written,  and  I  will  bring  him  to  the  scaffold." 
And  this  court  has  done  essentially  the  same.  Upon  that  law  every  person 
in  this  country  can  be  indicted  for  conspiracy,  and,  as  the  case  may  be,  for 
murder.  Every  member  of  a  trade  union,  of  the  Knights  of  Labor,  or  any 
other  labor  organization,  can  be  convicted  of  conspiracy,  and  in  cases  of 
violence,  for  which  they  may  not  be  responsible  at  all,  of  murder,  as  we 
have  been.  This  precedent  once  established,  you  force  the  masses  who 
are  now  agitating  in  a  peaceable  way  into  open  rebellion !  You  thereby 
shut  ofi"  the  last  safety  valve — and  the  blood  which  will  be  shed,  the  blood 
of  the  innocent — it  will  come  upon  your  heads ! 

"Seven  policemen  have  died,"  said  Grinnell,  suggestively  winking  at  the 
jury.  You  want  a  life  for  a  life,  and  have  convicted  an  equal  number  of 
men,  of  whom  it  cannot  be  truthfully  said  that  they  had  anything  whatever 
to  do  with  the  killing  of  Bonfield's  victims.  The  very  same  principle  of 
jurisprudence  we  find  among  various  savage  tribes.  Injuries  among  them 
are  equalized,  so  to  speak.  The  Chinooks  and  the  Arabs,  for  instance,  would 
demand  the  life  of  an  enemy  for  every  death  that  they  had  suffered  at  their 
enemy's  hands.  They  were  not  particular  in  regard  to  the  persons,  just  so 
long  as  they  had  a  life  for  a  life.  This  principle  also  prevails  today  among 
the  natives  of  the  Sandwich  Islands.  If  we  are  to  be  hanged  on  this  prin- 
ciple, then  let  us  know  it,  and  let  the  world  know  what  a  civilized  and 
Christian  country  it  is  in  which  the  Goulds,  the  Vanderbilts,  the  Stanfords, 
the  Fields,  Armours,  and  other  local  money  hamsters  have  come  to  the  rescue 
of  liberty  and  justice ! 

Grinnell  has  repeatedly  stated  that  our  country  is  an  enlightened  coun- 
try. The  verdict  fully  corroborates  the  assertion !  This  verdict  against  us 
is  the  anathema  of  the  wealthy  classes  over  their  despoiled  victims — the  vast 
army  of  wage  workers  and  farmers.  If  your  honor  would  not  have  these 
people  believe  this;  if  you  would  not  have  them  believe  that  we  have  once 
more  arrived  at  the  Spartan  Senate,  the  Athenian  Areopagus,  the  Venetian 
Council  of  Ten,  etc.,  then  sentence  should  not  be  pronounced.  But,  if  you 
think  that  1:y  hanging  us  you  can  stamp  out  the  labor  movement — the  move- 
ment from  which  the  downtrodden  millions,  the  millions  who  toil  and  live 
in  want  and  misery,  the  wage  slaves,  expect  salvation — if  this  is  your  opin- 
ion, then  hang  us !  Here  you  will  tread  upon  a  spark,  but  here,  and  there, 
and  behind  you,  and  in  front  of  you,  and  everywhere,  flames  will  blaze  up. 
It  is  a  subterranean  fire.  You  cannot  put  it  out.  The  ground  is  on  fire 
upon  which  you  stand.  You  can't  understand  it.  You  don't  believe  in  mag- 
ical arts,  as  your  grandfathers  did,  who  burned  witches  at  the  stake,  but 
you  do  believe  in  conspiracies ;  you  believe  that  all  these  occurrences  of  late 
are  the  work  of  conspirators !  You  resemble  the  child  that  is  looking  for 
his  picture  behind  the  mirror.  What  you  see,  and  what  you  try  to  grasp  is 
nothing  but  the  deceptive  reflex  of  the  stings  of  your  bad  conscience.  You 
want  to  "stamp  out  the  conspirators" — the  "agitators?"  Ah,  stamp  out 
every  factory  lord  who  has  grown  wealthy  upon  the  unpaid  labor  of  his 
employes.  Stamp  out  every  landlord  who  has  amassed  fortunes  from  the 
rent  of  overburdened  workingmen  and  farmers.  Stamp  out  every  machine 
that  is  revolutionizing  industry  and  agriculture,  that  intensifies  the  produc- 


ADDRESS  OF  AUGUST  SPIES  17 

tion,  ruins  the  producer,  that  increases  the  national  wealth,  while  the  creator 
of  all  these  things  stands  amidst  them  tantalized  with  hunger!  Stamp  out 
the  railroads,  the  telegraph,  the  telephone,  steam  and  yourselves — for  every- 
thing breathes  the  revolutionary  spirit. 

You,  gentlemen,  are  the  revolutionists !  You  rebel  against  the  effects  of 
social  conditions  which  have  tossed  you,  by  the  fair  hand  of  Fortune,  into  a 
magnificent  paradise.  Without  inquiring,  you  imagine  that  no  one  else  has  a 
right  in  that  place.  You  insist  that  you  are  the  chosen  ones,  the  sole  propri- 
etors. The  forces  that  tossed  you  into  the  paradise,  the  industrial  forces,  are 
still  at  work.  They  are  growing  more  active  and  intense  from  day  to  day. 
Their  tendency  is  to  elevate  all  mankind  to  the  same  level,  to  have  all  hu- 
manity share  in  the  paradise  you  now  monopolize.  You,  in  your  blindness, 
think  you  can  stop  the  tidal  wave  of  civilization  and  human  emancipation  by 
placing  a  few  policemen,  a  few  gatling  guns,  and  some  regiments  of  militia 
on  the  shore — you  think  you  can  frighten  the  rising  waves  back  into  the  un- 
fathomable depths,  whence  they  have  arisen,  by  erecting  a  few  gallows  in  the 
perspective.  You,  who  oppose  the  natural  course  of  things,  you  are  the  real 
revolutionists.  You  and  you  alone  are  the  conspirators  and  destructionists ! 

Said  the  court  yesterday,  in  referring  to  the  Board  of  Trade  demonstra- 
tion :  "These  men  started  out  with  the  express  purpose  of  sacking  the  Board 
of  Trade  building."  While  I  can't  see  what  sense  there  would  have  been  in 
such  an  undertaking,  and  while  I  know  that  the  said  demonstration  was 
arranged  simply  as  a  means  of  propaganda  against  the  system  that  legalizes 
the  respectable  business  carried  on  there,  I  will  assume  that  -the  three  thou- 
sand workingmen  who  marched  in  that  procession  really  intended  to  sack  the 
building.  In  this  case  they  would  have  differed  from  the  respectable  Board  of 
Trade  men  only  in  this — that  they  sought  to  recover  property  in  an  Unlawful 
way,  while  the  others  sack  the  entire  country  lawfully  and  unlawfully — this 
being  their  highly  respectable  profession.  This  court  of  "justice  and  equity" 
proclaims  the  principle  that  when  two  persons  do  the  same  thing,  it  is  not 
the  same  thing.  I  thank  the  court  for  this  confession.  It  contains  all  that  we 
have  taught  and  for  which  we  are  to  be  hanged,  in  a  nutshell !  Theft  is  a 
respectable  profession  when  practiced  by  the  privileged  class.  It  is  a  felony 
when  resorted  to  in  self-preservation  by  the  other  class.  Rapine  and  pillage 
are  the  order  of  a  certain  class  of  gentlemen  who  find  this  mode  of  earning 
a  livelihood  easier  and  preferable  to  honest  labor — this  is  the  kind  of  order 
we  have  attempted,  and  are  now  trying,  and  will  try  as  long  as  we  live  to  do 
away  with.  Look  upon  the  economic  battlefields !  Behold  the  carnage  and 
plunder  of  the  Christian  Patricians !  Accompany  me  to  the  quarters  of  the 
wealth  creators  in  this  city.  Go  with  me  to  the  half-starved  miners  of  the 
Hocking  Valley.  Look  at  the  pariahs  in  the  Monongahela  Valley,  and  many 
other  mining  districts  in  this  country,  or  pass  along  the  railroads  of  that 
great  and  most  orderly  and  law-abiding  citizen,  Jay  Gould.  And  then  tell  me 
whether  this  order  has  in  it  any  moral  principle  for  which  it  should  be  pre- 
served. I  say  that  the  preservation  of  such  an  order  is  criminal — is  murder- 
ous. It  means  the  preservation  of  the  systematic  destruction  of  children  and 
women  in  factories.  It  means  the  preservation  of  enforced  idleness  of  large 
armies  of  men,  and  their  degradation.  It  means  the  preservation  of  intem- 
perance, and  sexual  as  well  as  intellectual  prostitution.  It  means  the  preser- 
vation of  misery,  want  and  servility  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  dangerous  ac- 
cumulation of  spoils,  idleness,  voluptuousness  and  tyranny  on  the  other.  It 
means  the  preservation  of  vice  in  every  form.  And  last  but  not  least,  it 
means  the  preservation  of  the  class  struggle,  of  strikes,  riots  and  bloodshed. 
That  is  your  "order,"  gentlemen.  Yes,  and  it  is  worthy  of  you  to  be  the 
champions  of  such  an  order.  You  are  eminently  fitted  for  that  role.  You 
have  my  compliments ! 


18  ADDRESS  OF  AUGUST  SPIES 

Grinnell  spoke  of  Victor  Hugo.  I  need  not  repeat  what  he  said,*  but 
will  answer  him  in  the  language  of  one  of  our  German  philosophers :  "Our 
bourgeoisie  erect  monuments  in  honor  of  the  memory  of  the  classics.  If 
they  had  read  them  they  would  burn  them !"  Why,  amongst  the  articles  read 
here  from  the  Arbeiter-Zeitung,  put  in  evidence  by  the  State,  by  which  they 
intend  to  convince  the  jury  of  the  dangerous  character  of  the  accused  Anarch- 
ists, is  an  extract  from  Goethe's  Faust — 

"Es  erben  sich   Gesetz  und  Rechte, 

Wie  eine  ew'ge  Krankheit  fort,"  etc. 

(Laws  and  class  privileges  are  transmitted  like  an  hereditary  disease.)  And 
Mr.  Ingham  in  his  speech  told  the  Christian  jurors  that  our  comrades,  the 
Paris  Communists,  had  in  1871,  dethroned  God,  the  Almighty,  and  had  put  up 
in  His  place  a  low  prostitute.  The  effect  was  marvelous !  The  good  Chris- 
tians were  shocked.  I  wish  your  honor  would  inform  the  learned  gentleman 
that  the  episode  related  occurred  in  Paris  nearly  a  century  ago,  and  that  the 
sacrilegious  perpetrators  were  the  contemporaries  of  the  founders  of  this 
Republic — and  among  them  was  Thomas  Paine.  Nor  was  the  woman  a  pros- 
titute, but  a  good  citoyenne  de  Paris,  who  served  on  that  occasion  simply  as 
an  allegory  of  the  goddess  of  reason. 

Referring  to  Host's  letter,  read  here,  Mr.  Ingham  said :  "They,"  mean- 
ing Most  and  myself,  "they  might  have  destroyed  thousands  of  innocent  lives 
in  the  Hocking  Valley  with  that  dynamite."  I  have  said  ajl  I  know  about  the 
letter  on  the  witness  stand,  but  will  add  that  two  years  ago  I  went  through 
the  Hocking  Valley  as  a  correspondent.  While  there  I  saw  hundreds  of  lives 
in  the  process  of  slow  destruction,  gradual  destruction.  There  was  no  dyna- 
mite, nor  were  they  Anarchists,  who  did  that  diabolical  work.  It  was  the 
work  of  a  party  of  highly  respectable  monopolists,  law-abiding  citizens,  if  you 
please.  It  is  needless  to  say  the  murderers  were  never  indicted.  The  press 
had  little  to  say,  and  the  State  of  Ohio  assisted  them.  What  a  terror  it  would 
have  created  if  the  victims  of  this  diabolical  plot  had  resented  and  blown 
some  of  those  respectable  cut-throats  to  atoms !  When,  in  East  St.  Louis, 
Jay  Gould's  hirelings,  "the  men  of  grit,"  shot  down  in  cold  blood  and  killed 
six  inoffensive  workingmen  and  women,  there  was  very  little  said,  and  the 
grand  jury  refused  to  indict  the  gentlemen.  It  was  the  same  way  in  Chicago, 
Milwaukee  and  other  places.  A  Chicago  furniture  manufacturer  shot  down 
and  seriously  wounded  two  striking  workingmen  last  spring.  He  was  held 
over  to  the  grand  jury.  The  grand  jury  refused  'to  indict  the  gentleman. 
But  when,  on  one  occasion,  a  workingman  in  self-defense  resisted  the  mur- 
derous attempt  of  the  police  and  threw  a  bomb  and  for  once  blood  flowed  on 
the  other  side,  then  a  terrific  howl  went  up  all  over  the  land :  "Conspiracy 
has  attacked  vested  rights  !"  And  eight  victims  are  demanded  for  it.  There 
has  been  much  said  about  the  public  sentiment.  There  has  been  much  said 
about  the  public  clamor.  Why,  it  is  a  fact  that  no  citizen  dared  express 
another  opinion  than  that  prescribed  by  the  authorities  of  the  State,  for  if 
one  had  done  otherwise,  he  would  have  been  locked  up ;  he  might  have  been 
sent  to  the  gallows  to  swing,  as  they  will  have  the  pleasure  of  doing  with  us, 
if  the  degree  of  our  "honorable  court"  is  consummated. 

"These  men,"  Grinnell  said  repeatedly,  "have  no  principles ;  they  are 
common  murderers,  assassins,  robbers,"  etc.  I  admit  that  our  aspirations  and 
objects  are  incomprehensible  to  unprincipled  ruffians,  but  surely  for  this  we 
are  not  to  be  blamed.  The  assertion,  if  I  mistake  not,  was  based  upon  the 
ground  that  we  sought  to  destroy  property.  Whether  this  perversion  of  facts 
was  intentional,  I  know  not.  But  in  justification-  of  our  doctrines  I  will  say 
that  the  assertion  is  an  infamous  falsehood.  Articles  have  been  read  here 
from  the  Arbeiter-Zeitung  and  Alarm  to  show  the  dangerous  characters  of 

*  He  asserted  that  Victor  Hugo's  writings  (of  which  he  knows  no  more  than  the 
average  policeman)  were  not  revolutionary. 


ADDRESS  OF  AUGUST  SPIES  19 

the  defendants.  The  files  of  the  Arbeiter-Zeitung  and  Alarm  have  been 
searched  for  the  past  years.  Those  articles  which  generally  commented  upon 
some  atrocity  committed  by  the  authorities  upon  striking  workingmen  were 
picked  out  and  read  to  you.  Other  articles  were  not  read  to  the  court. 
Other  articles  were  not  what  was  wanted.  The  State's  attorney  (who  well 
knows  that  he  tells  a  falsehood  when  he  says  it),  upon  those  articles  asserts 
that  "these  men  have  no  principles." 

A  few  weeks  before  I  was  arrested  and  charged  with  the  crime  for  which 
I  have  been  convicted,  I  was  invited  by  the  clergyman  of  the  Congregational 
Church  to  lecture  upon  the  subject  of  Socialism,  and  debate  with  them.  This 
took  place  at  the  Grand  Pacific  Hotel.  And  so  that  it  cannot  be  said  that 
after  I  have  been  arrested,  after  I  have  been  indicted,  and  after  I  have  been 
convicted,  I  have  put  together  some  principles  to  justify  my  action,  I  will  read 
what  I  said  then 

Capt.  Black :     Give  the  date  of  the  paper. 

Mr.  Spies  :     January  9,  1886. 

Capt.  Black :     What  paper,  the  Alarm  ? 

Mr.  Spies :  The  Alarm.  When  I  was  asked  upon  that  occasion  what 
Socialism  was,  I  said  this : 

"Socialism  is  simply  a  resume  of  the  phenomena  of  the  social  life  of 
the  past  and  present  traced  to  their  fundamental  causes,  and  brought  into 
logical  connection  with  one  another.  It  rests  upon  the  established  fact  that 
the  economic  conditions  and  institutions  of  a  people  from  the  ground  work 
of  all  their  social  conditions,  of  their  ideas — aye,  even  of  their  religion,  and 
further,  that  all  changes  of  economic  conditions,  every  step  in  advance,  arise 
from  the  struggles  between  the  dominating  and  dominated  class  in  different 
ages.  You,  gentlemen,  cannot  place  yourselves  at  this  standpoint  of  specula- 
tive science;  your  profession  demands  that  you  occupy  the  opposite  position; 
not  that  which  professes  acquaintance  with  things  as  they  actually  exist,  but 
which  presumes  a  thorough  understanding  of  matters  which  to  ordinary 
mortals  are  entirely  incomprehensible.  It  is  for  this  reason  that  you  cannot 
become  Socialists.  (Cries  of  'Oh!  Oh!')  Lest  you  should  be  unable  to 
exactly  grasp  my  meaning,  however,  I  will  now  state  the  matter  a  little  more 
plainly.  It  cannot  be  unknown  to  you  that  in  the  course  of  this  century  there 
have  appeared  an  infinite  number  of  inventions  and  discoveries,  which  have 
brought  about  great,  aye,  astonishing  changes  in  the  production  of  the  neces- 
sities and  comforts  of  life.  The  work  of  machines  has,  to  a  great  extent, 
replaced  that  of  men. 

"Machinery  involves  a  great  accumulation  of  power,  and  always  a  greater 
division  of  labor  in  consequence. 

"The  advantages  resulting  from  this  centralization  of  production  were  of 
such  a  nature  as  to  cause  its  still  further  extension,  and  from  this  concen- 
tration of  the  means  of  labor  and  of  the  operations  of  laborers,  while  the 
old  system  of  distribution  was  (and  is)  retained,  arose  those  improper  condi- 
tions which  ail  society  today. 

"The  means  of  production  thus  came  into  the  hands  of  an  ever  decreasing 
number,  while  the  actual  producers,  through  the  introduction  of  machinery, 
deprived  of  the  opportunity  to  toil,  and  being  at  the  same  time  disinherited 
of  the  bounties  of  nature,  were  consigned  to  pauperism,  vagabondage — the 
so-called  crime  and  prostitution — all  these  evtls  which  you,  gentlemen,  would 
like  to  exorcise  with  your  little  prayer  book. 

"The  Socialists  award  your  efforts  a  jocular  rather  than  a  serious 
attention  (symptoms  of  uneasiness)  otherwise,  pray,  let  us  know  how  much 
you  have  accomplished  so  far  by  your  moral  lecturing  toward  ameliorating 
the  condition  of  those  wretched  beings  who  through  bitter  want  have  been 
driven  to  crime  and  desperation?  (Here  several  gentlemen  sprang  to  their 
feet,  exclaiming,  'We  have  done  a  great  deal  in  some  directions !')  Aye,  in 


20  ADDRESS  OF  AUGUST  SPIES 

some  cases  you  have  perhaps  given  a  few  alms;  but  what  influence  has  this, 
if  I  may  ask,  had  upon  societary  conditions,  or  in  effecting  any  change  in  the 
same?  Nothing;  absolutely  nothing.  You  may  as  well  admit  it,  gentlemen, 
for  you  cannot  point  me  out  a  single  instance. 

'rVery  well.  The  proletarians  doomed  to  misery  and  hunger  through 
the  labor  saving  of  our  centralized  production,  whose  number  in  this  coun- 
try we  estimate  at  about  a  million  and  a  half,  is  it  likely  that  they  and  the 
thousands  who  are  daily  joining  their  ranks,  and  the  millions  who  are  toiling 
for  a  miserable  pittance,  will  suffer  peacefully  and  with  Christian  resigna- 
tion their  destruction  at  the  hands  of  their  thievish  and  murderous,  albeit 
very  Christian,  wage  masters?  They  will  defend  themselves.  It  will  come 
to  a  fight. 

"The  necessity  of  common  ownership  in  the  means  of  toil  will  be  real- 
ized, and  the  era  of  Socialism,  of  universal  co-operation,  begins.  The  dispos- 
sessing of  the  usurping  classes — the  socialization  of  these  possessions — and 
the  universal  co-operation  of  toil,  not  for  speculative  purposes,  but  for  the 
satisfaction  of  the  demands  which  we  make  upon  life ;  in  short  co-operative 
labor  for  the  purpose  of  continuing  life  and  of  enjoying  it  —  this  in  gen- 
eral outlines,  is  Socialism.  This  is  not,  however,  as  you  might  suppose, 
a  mere  'beautifully  conceived  plan,'  the  realization  of  which  would  be  well 
worth  striving  for  if  it  could  only  be  brought  about.  No;  this  socialization 
of  the  means  of  production,  of  the  machinery  of  commerce,  of  the  land  and 
earth,  etc.,  is  not  only  something  desirable,  but  has  become  an  imperative 
necessity,  and  wherever  we  find  in  history  that  something  has  once  become 
a  necessity,  there  we  always  find  that  the  next  step  was  the  doing  away  with 
that  necessity  by  the  supplying  of  the  logical  want. 

"Our  large  factories  and  mines,  and  the  machinery  of  exchange  and 
transportation,  apart  from  every  other  consideration,  have  become  too  vast 
for  private  control.  Individuals  can  no  longer  monopolize  them. 

"Everywhere,  wherever  we  cast  our  eyes,  we  find  forced  upon  our  atten- 
tion the  unnatural  and  injurious  effects  of  unregulated  private  production. 
We  see  how  one  man,  or  a  number  of  men,  have  not  only  brought  into  the 
embrace  of  their  private  ownership  a  few  inventions  in  technical  lines,  but 
have  also  confiscated  for  their  exclusive  advantage  all  natural  powers,  such 
as  water,  steam,  and  electricity.  Every  fresh  invention,  every  discovery  be- 
longs to  them.  The  world  exists  for  them  only.  That  they  destroy  their 
fellow  beings  right  and  left  they  little  care.  That,  by  their  machinery,  they 
even  work  the  bodies  of  little  children  into  gold  pieces,  they  hold  to  be  an 
especially  good  work  and  a  genuine  Christian  act.  They  murder,  as  we  have 
said,  little  children  and  women  by  hard  labor,  while  they  let  strong  men  go 
hungry  for  lack  of  work. 

"People  ask  themselves  how  such  things  are  possible,  and  the  answer  is 
that  the  competitive  system  is  the  cause  of  it.  The  thought  of  a  co-opera- 
tive, social,  rational,  and  well  regulated  system  of  management  irresistibly 
impresses  the  observer.  The  advantages  of  such  a  system  are  of  such  a 
convincing  kind,  so  patent  to  observation — and  where  could  there  be  any 
other  way  out  of  it?  According  to  physical  laws  a  body  always  moves  itself, 
consciously  or  unconsciously,  along  the  line  of  least  resistance.  So  does  so- 
ciety as  a  whole.  The  path  of  co-operative  labor  and  distribution  is  leveled 
by  the  concentration  of  the  means  of  labor  under  the  private  capitalistic 
system.  We  are  already  moving  right  in  that  track.  We  cannot  retreat  even 
if  we  would.  The  force  of  circumstances  drives  us  on  to  Socialism. 

"  'And  now,  Mr.  Spies,  won't  you  tell  us  how  you  are  going  to  carry  out 
the  expropriation  of  the  possessing  classes?'  asked  Rev.  Dr.  Scudder. 

"  'The  answer  is  the  thing  itself.  The  key  is  furnished  by  the  storms 
raging  through  the  industrial  life  of  the  present.  You  see  how  penuriously 
the  owners  of  the  factories,  of  the  mines,  cling  to  their  privileges,  and  will 


ADDRESS  OF  AUGUST  SPIES  21 

not  yield  the  breadth  of  an  inch.  On  the  other  hand,  you  see  the  half-starved 
proletarians  driven  to  the  verge  of  violence.' 

"'So  your  remedy  would  be  violence?' 

"'Remedy?  Well,  I  should  like  it  better  if  it  could  be  done  without 
violence,  but  you,  gentlemen,  and  the  class  you  represent,  take  care  that  it 
cannot  be  accomplished  otherwise.  Let  us  suppose  that  the  workingmen  of 
today  go  to  their  employers,  and  say  to  them :  "Listen !  Your  administration 
of  affairs  doesn't  suit  us  any  more;  it  leads  to  disastrous  consequences. 
While  one  part  of  us  are  worked  to  death,  the  others,  out  of  employment, 
are  starved  to  death ;  little  children  are  ground  to  death  in  the  factories, 
while  strong,  vigorous  men  remain  idle ;  the  masses  live  in  misery  while  a 
small  class  of  respectables  enjoy  luxury  and  wealth;  all  this  is  the  result 
of  your  maladministration,  which  will  bring  misfortune  even  to  yourselves ; 
step  down  and  out  now:  let  us  have  your  property,  which  is  nothing  but  un- 
paid labor ;  we  shall  take  this  thing  in  our  own  hands ;  we  shall  administrate 
matters  satisfactorily,  and  regulate  the  institutions  of  society ;  voluntarily  we 
shall  pay  you  a  life-long  pension."  Now,  do  you  think  the  "bosses"  would 
accept  this  proposition?  You  certainly  don't  believe  it.  Therefore  force  will 
have  to  decide — or  do  you  know  of  any  other  way?' 

"  'So  you  are  organizing  a  revolution  ?' 

"It  was  shortly  before  my  arrest,  and  I  answered :  'Such  things  are  hard 
to  organize.  A  revolution  is  a  sudden  upswelling — a  convulsion  of  the 
fevered  masses  of  society.' 

"We  are  preparing  society  for  that,  and  insist  upon  it  that  workingmen 
should  arm  themselves  and  keep  ready  for  the  struggle.  The  better  they  are 
armed  the  easier  will  the  battle  be,  and  the  less  the  bloodshed. 

''  'What  would  be  the  order  of  things  in  the  new  society?' 

"  'I  must  decline  to  answer  this  question,  as  it  is,  till  now,  a  mere  matter 
of  speculation.  The  organization  of  labor  on  a  co-operative  basis  offers  no 
difficulties.  The  large  establishments  of  today  might  be  used  as  patterns. 
Those  who  will  have  to  solve  these  questions  will  expediently  do  it,  instead 
of  working  according  to  our  prescriptions — if  we  should  make  anything  of 
the  kind;  they  will  be  directed  by  the  circumstances  and  conditions  of  the 
time,  and  these  are  beyond  our  horizon.  About  this  you  needn't  trouble 
yourselves.' 

"  'But,  friend,  don't  you  think  that  about  a  week  after  the  division,  the 
provident  will  have  all,  while  the  spendthrift  will  have  nothing?' 

"  'The  question  is  out  of  order/  interfered  the  chairman ;  'there  was 
nothing  said  about  division.' 

"Prof.  Wilcox:  'Don't  you  think  the  introduction  of  Socialism  would 
destroy  all  individuality?' 

"'How  can  anything  be  destroyed  which  does  not  exist?  In  our  times 
there  is  no  individuality;  that  only  can  be  developed  under  Socialism,  when 
mankind  will  be  independent  economically.  Where  do  you  meet  today  with 
real  individuality?  Look  at  yourselves,  gentlemen!  You  don't  dare  to  give 
utterance  to  any  subjective  opinion  which  might  not  suit  the  feelings  of  your 
bread  givers  and  customers.  You  are  hypocrites  (murmurs  of  indignation)  ; 
every  business  man  is  a  hypocrite.  Everywhere  is  mockery,  servility,  lies 
and  fraud.  And  the  laborers!  You  feign  anxiety  about  their  individuality; 
about  the  individuality  of  a  class  that  has  been  degraded  to  machines — used 
each  day  for  ten  or  twelve  hours  as  appendages  of  the  lifeless  machines ! 
About  their  individuality  you  are  anxious !' " 

Does  that  sound  as  though  I  had  at  that  time,  as  has  been  imputed  to 
me,  organized  a  revolution — a  so-called  social  revolution,  which  was  to  oc- 
cur on  or  about  the  first  of  May  to  establish  Anarchy  in  place,  of  our  present 
"ideal  order?"  I  guess  not. 

So  Socialism  does  not  mean  the  destruction  of  society.     Socialism  is  a 


22  ADDRESS  OF  AUGUST  SPIES 

constructive  and  not  a  destructive  science.  While  capitalism  expropriates 
the  masses  for  the  benefit  of  the  privileged  class;  while  capitalism  is  that 
school  of  economics  which  teaches  how  one  can  live  upon  the  labor  (i  e., 
property)  of  others ;  Socialism  teaches  how  all  may  possess  property,  and 
further  teaches  that  every  man  must  work  honestly  for  his  own  living,  and 
not  be  playing  the  "respectable  board  of  trade  man,"  or  any  other  highly  (?) 
respectable  business  man  or  banker,  such  as  appeared  here  as  talesmen  in 
the  jurors'  box,  with  the  fixed  opinion  that  we  ought  to  be  hanged.  Indeed, 
I  believe  they  have  that  opinion !  Socialism,  in  short,  seeks  to  establish  a 
universal  system  of  co-operation,  and  to  render  accessible  to  each  and  every 
member  of  the  human  family  the  achievements  and  benefits  of  civilization, 
which,  under  capitalism,  are  being  monopolized  by  a  privileged  class,  and 
employed,  not  as  they  should  be,  for  the  common  good  of  all,  but  for  the 
brutish  gratification  of  an  avaricious  class.  Under  capitalism  the  great  inven- 
tions of  the  past,  far  from  being  a  blessing  for  mankind,  have  been  turned 
into  a  curse !  Under  Socialism  the  prophecy  of  the  Greek  poet,  Antiporas, 
would  be  fulfilled,  who,  at  the  invention  of  the  first  water  mill,  exclaimed : 
"This  is  the  emancipator  of  male  and  female  slaves";  and  likewise  the  pre- 
diction of  Aristotle,  who  said :  "When,  at  some  future  age,  every  tool,  upon 
command  or  predestination,  will  perform  its  work  as  the  art  works  of  Dae- 
dalus did,  which  moved  by  themselves,  or  like  the  three  feet  of  Hephaestos 
which  went  to  their  sacred-  work  instinctively,  when  thus  the  weaver  shuttles 
will  weave  by  themselves,  then  we  shall  no  longer  have  masters  and  slaves." 
Socialism  says  this  time  has  come,  and  can  you  deny  it?  You  say:  "Oh, 
these  heathens,  what  did  they  know?"  True!  They  knew  nothing  of  polit- 
ical economy;  they  knew  nothing  of  Christendom.  They  failed  to  conceive 
how  nicely  these  men-emancipating  machines  could  be  employed  to  lengthen 
the  hours  of  toil  and  to  intensify  the  burdens  of  the  slaves.  These  heathens, 
yes,  they  excused  the  slavery  of  the  one  on  the  ground  that  thereby  another 
would  be  afforded  the  opportunity  of  human  development.  But  to  preach 
the  slavery  of  the  masses  in  order  that  a  few  rude  and  arrogant  parvenues 
might  become  "eminent  manufacturers,"  "extensive  packing  house  owners," 
or  "influential  shoe  black  dealers" — to  do  this  they  lacked  that  specific  Chris- 
tian organ. 

Socialism  teaches  that  the  machines,  the  means  of  transportation  and 
communication  are  the  result  of  the  combined  efforts  of  society,  past  and 
present,  and  that  they  are  therefore  rightfully  the  indivisible  property  of 
society,  just  the  same  as  the  soil  and  the  mines  and  all  natural  gifts  should 
be.  This  declaration  implies  that  those  who  have  appropriated  this  wealth 
wrongfully,  though  lawfully,  shall  be  expropriated  by  society.  The  expropri- 
ation of  the  masses  by  the  monopolists  has  reached  such  a  degree  that  the 
expropriation  of  the  expropriators  has  become  an  imperative  necessity,  an  act 
of  social  self-preservation.  Society  will  reclaim  its  own,  even  though  you 
erect  a  gibbet  on  every  street  corner.  And  Anarchism,  this  terrible  "ism," 
deduces  that  under  a  co-operative  organization  of  society,  under  economic 
equality  and  individual  independence,  the  State — the  political  State — will  pass 
into  barbaric  antiquity.  And  we  will  be  where  all  are  free,  where  there  are 
no  longer  masters  and  servants,  where  intellect  stands  for  brute  force ;  there 
will  no  longer  be  any  use  for  the  policemen  and  militia  to  preserve  the  so- 
called  "peace  and  order" — the  order  that  the  Russian  general  spoke  of  when 
he  telegraphed  to  the  Czar  after  he  had  massacred  half  of  Warsaw,  "Peace 
reigns  in  Warsaw !" 

Anarchism  does  not  mean  bloodshed ;  does  not  mean  robbery,  arson,  etc. 
These  monstrosities  are,  on  the  contrary,  the  characteristic  features  of  capi- 
talism. Anarchism  means  peace  and  tranquillity  to  all.  Anarchism,  or 
Socialism,  means  the  re-organization  of  society  upon  scientific  principles  and 


ADDRESS  OF  AUGUST  SPIES  23 

the  abolition  of  causes  which  produce  vice  and  crime.  Capitalism  first  pro- 
duces these  social  diseases  and  then  seeks  to  cure  them  by  punishment. 

The  court  has  had  a  great  deal  to  say  about  the  incendiary  character  of 
the  articles  rea.1  from  the  Arbeiter-Zeitung.  Let  me  read  to  you  an  editorial 
which  appeared  in  the  Fond  du  Lac  Commonwealth,  in  October,  1886,  a 
Republican  paper.  If  I  am  not  mistaken  the  court  is  Republican,  too. 

"To  arms,  Republicans !  Work  in  every  town  in  Wisconsin  for  men  not 
afraid  of  firearms,  blood  or  dead  bodies,  to  preserve  peace  (that  is  the 
'peace'  I  have  been  speaking  of)  and  quiet;  avoid  a  conflict  of  parties  to 
prevent  the  administiation  of  public  affairs  from  falling  into  the  hands  of 
such  obnoxious  men  as  James  G.  Jenkins.  Every  Republican  in  Wisconsin 
should  go  armed  to  the  polls  next  election  day.  The  grain  stacks,  houses  and 
barns  of  active  Democrats  should  be  burned ;  their  children  burned  and  their 
wives  outraged,  that  they  may  understand  that  the  Republican  party  is  the 
one  which  is  bound  to  rule,  and  the  one  which  they  should  vote  for,  or  keep 
their  vile  carcasses  away  from  the  polls.  If  they  still  persist  in  going  to  the 
polls,  and  persist  in  voting  for  Jenkins,  meet  them  on  the  road,  in  the  bush, 
on  the  hill,  or  anywhere,  and  shoot  every  one  of  these  base  cowards  and 
agitators.  If  they  are  too  strong  in  any  locality,  and  succeed  in  putting  their 
opposition  votes  in  the  ballot  box,  break  open  the  box  and  tear  in  shreds 
their  discord-breathing  ballots.  Burn  them.  This  is  the  time  for  effective 
work.  Yellow  fever  will  not  catch  among  Morrison  Democrats ;  so  we  must 
use  less  noisy  and  more  effective  means.  The  agitators  must  be  put  down, 
and  whoever  opposes  us  does  so  at  his  peril.  Republicans,  be  at  the  polls 
in  accordance  with  the  above  directions,  and  don't  stop  for  a  little  blood. 
That  which  made  the  solid  South  will  make  a  solid  North  !" 

What  does  your  honor  say  to  these  utterances  of  a  "law  and  order" 
organ — a  Republican  organ?  How  does  the  Arbeiter-Zeitung  compare  with 
this? 

The  book  of  John  Most,  which  was  introduced  in  court,  I  have  never 
read,  and  I  admit  that  passages  were  read  here  that  are  repulsive — that  must 
be  repulsive  to  any  person  who  has  a  heart.  But  I  call  your  attention  to  the 
fact  that  these  passages  have  been  translated  from  a  pubilcation  of  Andrieux, 
the  ex-prefect  of  police,  Paris,  by  an  exponent  of  your  order !  Have  the 
representatives  of  your  order  ever  stopped  at  the  sacrifice  of  human  blood? 
Never ! 

It  has  been  charged  that  we  (the  eight  here)  constituted  a  conspiracy. 
I  would  reply  to  that  that  my  friend  Lingg  I  had  seen  but  twice  at  meetings 
of  the  Central  Labor  Union,  where  I  went  as  a  reporter,  before  I  was 
arrested.  I  had  never  spoken  to  him.  With  Engel,  I  have  not  been  on 
speaking  terms  for  at  least  a  year.  And  Fischer,  my  lieutenant  (?),  used  to 
go  around  and  make  speeches  against  me.  So  much  for  that. 

Your  honor  has  said  this  morning,  "we  must  learn  their  objects  from 
what  they  have  said  and  written,"  and  in  pursuance  thereof  the  court  has 
read  a  number  of  articles. 

Now,  if  I  had  as  much  power  as  the  court,  and  were  a  law-abiding 
citizen,  I  would  certainly  have  the  court  indicted  for  some  remarks  made 
during  this  trial.  I  will  say  that  if  I  had  not  been  an  Anarchist  at  the 
beginning  of  this  trial  I  would  be  one  now.  I  quote  the  exact  language  of 
the  court  on  one  occasion :  "It  does  not  necessarily  follow  that  all  laws  are 
foolish  and  bad  because  a  good  many  of  them  are  so."  That  is  treason,  sir ! 
if  we  are  to  believe  the  court  and  the  State's  attorney.  But,  aside  from  that, 
I  cannot  see  how  we  shall  distinguish  the  good  from  the  bad  laws.  Am  I  to 
judge  of  that?  No;  I  am  not.  But  if  I  disobey  a  bad  law,  and  am  brought 
before  a  bad  judge,  I  undoubtedly  would  be  convicted. 

In  regard  to  a  report  in  the  Arbeiter-Zeitung,  also  read  this  morning, 
the  report  of  the  Board  of  Trade  demonstration,  I  would  say  (and  this  is 


24  ADDRESS  OF  AUGUST  SPIES 

the  only  defense,  the  only  word  I  have  to  say  in  my  own  defense)  that  I 
did  not  know  of  that  article  until  I  saw  it  in  the  paper,  and  the  man  who 
wrote  it,  wrote  it  rather  as  a  reply  to  some  slurs  in  the  morning  papers. 
He  was  discharged.  The  language  used  in  that  article  would  never  have 
been  tolerated  if  I  had  seen  it. 

Now,  if  we  cannot  be  directly  implicated  with  this  affair,  connected 
with  the  throwing  of  the  bomb,  where  is  the  law  that  says,  these  men  shall 
be  picked  out  to  suffer?  Show  me  that  law  if  you  have  it!  If  the  posi- 
tion of  the  court  is  correct,  then  half  of  the  population  of  this  city  ought 
to  be  hanged,  because  they  are  responsible  the  same  as  we  are  for  that  act 
on  May  4.  And  if  half  of  the  population  of  Chicago  is  not  hanged,  then 
show  me  the  law  that  says,  "eight  men  shall  be  picked  out  and  hanged  as 
scapegoats !"  You  have  no  good  law.  Your  decision,  your  verdict,  our 
conviction  is  nothing  but  an  arbitrary  will  of  this  lawless  court.  It  is  true 
there  is  no  precedent  in  jurisprudence  in  this  case !  It  is  true  we  have  called 
upon  the  people  to  arm  themselves.  It  is  true  that  we  told  them  time  and 
again  that  the  great  day  of  change  was  coming.  It  was  not  our  desire  to 
have  bloodshed.  We  are  not  beasts.  We  would  not  be  Socialists  if  we 
were  beasts.  It  is  because  of  our  sensitiveness  that  we  have  gone  into  this 
movement  for  the  emancipation  of  the  oppressed  and  suffering.  It  is  true 
we  have  called  upon  the  people  to  arm  and  prepare  for  the  stormy  times 
before  us. 

This  seems  to  be  the  ground  upon  which  the  verdict  is  to  be  sustained. 
"But  when  a  long  train  of  abuses  and  usurpations  pursuing  invariably  the 
same  object  evinces  a  design  to  reduce  the  people  under  absolute  despot- 
ism, it  is  their  right,  it  is  their  duty  to  throw  off  such  government  and  pro- 
vide new  guards  for  their  future  safety."  This  is  a  quotation  from  the 
Declaration  of  Independence.  Have  we  broken  any  laws  by  showing  to  the 
people  how  these  abuses,  that  have  occurred  for  the  last  twenty  years,  are 
invariably  pursuing  one  object,  viz :  to  establish  an  oligarchy  in  this  coun- 
try so  strong  and  powerful  and  monstrous  as  never  before  has  existed  in 
any  country?  I  can  well  understand  why  that  man  Grinnell  did  not  urge 
upon  the  grand  jury  to  charge  us  with  treason.  I  can  well  understand  it. 
You  cannot  try  and  convict  a  man  for  treason  who  has  upheld  the  con- 
stitution against  those  who  trample  it  under  their  feet.  It  would  not  have 
been  as  easy  a  job  to  do  that,  Mr.  Grinnell,  as  to  charge  these  men  with 
murder. 

Now,  these  are  my  ideas.  They  constitute  a  part  of  myself.  I  cannot 
divest  myself  of  them,  nor  would  I,  if  I  could.  And  if  you  think  that  you 
can  crush  out  these  ideas  that  are  gaining  ground  more  and  more  every 
day ;  if  you  think  you  can  crush  them  out  by  sending  us  to  the  gallows ;  if 
you  would  once  more  have  people  suffer  the  penalty  of  death  because  they 
have  dared  to  tell  the  truth — and  I  defy  you  to  show  us  where  we  have 
told  a  lie — I  say,  if  death  is  the  penalty  for  proclaiming  the  truth,  then  I 
will  proudly  and  defiantly  pay  the  costly  price !  Call  your  hangman !  Truth 
crucified  in  Socrates,  in  Christ,  in  Giordano  Bruno,  in  Huss,  in  Galileo, 
still  lives — they  and  others  whose  number  is  legion  have  preceded  us  on 
this  path.  We  are  ready  to  follow ! 


cADDRESS  OF  LOUIS  LINGG 

COURT  OF  J  USTICE  :  With  the  same  irony  with  which  you  have  regarded 
my  efforts  to  win,  in  this  "free  land  of  America,"  a  livelihood  such  as  hu- 
man-kind is  worthy  to  enjoy,  do  you  now,  after  condemning  me  to  death, 
concede  me  the  liberty  of  making  a  final  speech. 

I  accept  your  concession ;  but  it  is  only  for  the  purpose  of  exposing  the 
injustice,  the  calumnies,  and  the  outrages  which  have  been  heaped  upon  me. 

You  have  accused  me  of  murder,  and  convicted  me;  what  proof  have 
you  brought  that  I  am  guilty? 

In  the  first  place,  you  have  brought  this  fellow  Seliger  to  testify  against 
me.  Him  I  have  helped  to  make  bombs,  and  you  have  further  proven  that 
with  the  assistance  of  another,  I  took  those  bombs  to  No.  58  Clybourn 
avenue,  but  what  you  have  not  proved — even  with  the  assistance  of  your 
bought  "squealer,"  Seliger,  who  would  appear  to  have  acted  such  a  promi- 
nent part  in  the  affair — is  that  any  of  those  bombs  were  taken  to  the  Hay- 
market. 

A  couple  of  chemists  also  have  been  brought  here  as  specialists,  yet 
they  could  only  state  that  the  metal  of  which  the  Haymarket  bomb  was  made 
bore  a  certain  resemblance  to  those  bombs  of  mine,  and  your  Mr.  Ingham 
has  vainly  endeavorec1  to  deny  that  the  bombs  were  quite  different.  He  had 
to  admit  that  ihere  was  a  difference  of  a  full  half  inch  in  their  diameters, 
although  he  suppressed  the  fact  that  there  was  also  a  difference  of  a  quar- 
ter of  an  inch  in  the  thickness  of  the  shell.  This  is  the  kind  of  evidence 
upon  which  you  have  convicted  me. 

It  is  not  murder,  however,  of  which  you  have  convicted  me.  The  judge 
has  stated  that  much  only  this  morning  in  his  resume  of  the  case,  and  Grin- 
nell  has  repeatedly  asserted  that  we  were  being  tried,  not  for  murder,  but 
for  Anarchy,  so  that  the  condemnation  is — that  I  am  an  Anarchist ! 

What  is  Anarchy? 

This  is  a  subject  which  my  comrades  have  explained  with  sufficient 
clearness,  and  it  is  unnecessary  for  me  to  go  over  it  again.  They  have  told 
you  plainly  enough  what  our  aims  are.  The  State's  attorney,  however,  has 
not  given  you  that  information.  He  has  merely  criticized  and  condemned 
not  the  doctrines  of  Anarchy,  but  our  methods  of  giving  them  practical 
effect,  and  even  here  he  has  maintained  a  discreet  silence  as  to  the  fact  that 
those  methods  were  forced  upon  us  by  the  brutality  of  the  police.  Grinnell's 
own  proffered  remedy  for  our  grievances  is  the  ballot  and  combination  of 
Trades  Unions,  and  Ingham  has  even  avowed  the  desirability  of  a  six  hour 
movement !  But  the  fact  is,  that  at  every  attempt  to  wield  the  ballot,  at 
every  endeavor  to  combine  the  efforts  of  workingmen,  you  have  displayed  the 
brutal  violence  of  the  police  club,  and  this  is  why  I  have  recommended  rude 
force  to  combat  the  ruder  force  of  the  police. 

You  have  charged  me  with  despising  "law  and  order."  What  does  your 
"law  and  order"  amount  to?  Its  representatives  are  the  police,  and  they 
have  thieves  in  their  ranks.  Here  sits  Captain  Schaack.  He  has  himself  ad- 
mitted to  me  that  my  hat  and  books  have  been  stolen  from  him  in  his  office 
— stolen  by  policemen.  These  are  your  defenders  of  property  rights ! 

The  detectives  again,  who  arrested  me,  forced  their  way  into  my  room 
like  house  breakers,  under  false  pretenses,  giving  the  name  of  a  carpenter, 
Lorenz,  of  Burlington  street.  They  have  sworn  that  I  was  alone  in  my 
room,  therein  perjuring  themselves.  You  have  not  subpoenaed  this  lady,  Mrs. 
Klein,  who  was  present,  and  could  have  sworn  that  the  aforesaid  detectives 


ADDRESS  OF  LOUIS  LIXGG  35 

broke  into  my  room  under  false  pretenses,  and  that  their  testimonies  are 
perjured. 

But  let  us  go  further.  In  Schaack  we  have  a  captain  of  the  police,  and 
he  also  has  perjured  himself.  He  has  sworn  that  I  admitted  to  him  being 
present  at  the  Monday  night's  meeting,  whereas  I  distinctly  informed  him 
that  I  was  at  a  carpenters'  meeting  at  Zepf's  Hall.  He  has  sworn  again  that 
I  told  him  thai  I  had  learned  how  to  make  bombs  from  Herr  Most's  book. 
That,  also,  is  perjury. 

Let  us  go  still  a  step  higher  among  these  representatives  of  "law  and 
order."  Grinnell  ana  his  associates  have  permitted  perjury,  and  I  say  that 
they  have  done  it  knowingly.  The  proof  has  been  adduced  by  my  counsel, 
and  with  my  own  eyes  I  have  seen  Grinnell  point  out  to  Gilmer,  eight  days 
before  he  came  upon  the  stand,  the  persons  of  the  men  whom  he  was  to 
swear  against. 

While  I,  as  I  have  stated  above,  believe  in  force  for  the  sake  of  winning 
for  myself  and  fellow  workmen  a  livelihood  such  as  men  ought  to  have, 
Grinnell,  on  the  other  hand,  through  his  police  and  other  rogues,  has 
suborned  perjury  in  order  to  murder  seven  men,  of  whom  I  am  one. 

Grinnell  had  the  pitiful  courage,  here  in  this  courtroom,  where  I  could 
not  defend  myself,  *o  call  me  a  coward !  The  scroundrel !  A  fellow  who  has 
leagued  himself  with  a  parcel  of  base  hireling  knaves,  to  bring  me  to  the  gal- 
lows. Why?  For  no  earthly  reason  save  a  contemptible  selfishness —  a  de- 
sire to  "rise  in  the  world" — to  "make  money,"  forsooth ! 

This  wretch — who,  by  means  of  the  perjuries  of  other  wretches  is  going 
to  murder  seven  men — is  the  fellow  who  calls  me  "coward"  !  And  yet  you 
blame  me  for  despising  such  "defenders  of  the  law" — such  unspeakable 
hypocrites ! 

Anarchy  means  no  domination  or  authority  of  one  man  over  another,  yet 
you  call  that  "disorder."  A  system  which  advocates  no  such  "order"  as  shall 
require  the  services  of  rogues  and  thieves  to  defend  it  you  call  "disorder." 

The  judge  himself  was  forced  to  admit  that  the  State's  attorney  had  not 
been  able  to  connect  me  with  the  bomb  throwing.  The  latter  knows  how  to 
get  around  it,  however.  He  charges  me  with  being  a  "conspirator."  How 
does  he  prove  it?  Simply  declaring  the  International  Workingmen's  As- 
sociation to  be  a  "conspiracy."  I  was  a  member  of  that  body,  so  he  has  the 
charge  securely  fastened  on  me.  Excellent !  Nothing  is  too  difficult  for  the 
genius  of  a  State's  attorney ! 

It  is  hardly  incumbent  upon  me  to  review  the  relations  which  I  occupy 
to  my  companions  in  misfortune.  My  friend  Spies  has  already  explained  how 
we  became  acquainted  with  each  other.  I  can  say  truly  and  openly  that  I 
am  not  as  intimate  with  my  fellow  prisoners  as  I  am  with  Captain  Schaack. 

The  universal  misery,  the  ravages  of  the  capitalistic  hyena  have  brought 
us  together  in  our  agitation,  not  as  perosns,  but  as  workers  in  the  same 
cause.  Such  is  the  "conspiracy"  of  which  you  have  convicted  me. 

I  protest  against  the  conviction,  against  the  decision  of  the  court.  I  do 
not  recognize  your  law,  jumbled  together  as  it  is  by  the  nobodies  of  by-gone 
centuries,  and  I  do  not  recognize  the  decision  of  the  court.  My  own  counsel 
have  conclusively  proven  from  the  decisions  of  equally  high  courts  that  a 
new  trial  must  be  granted  us.  The  State's  attorney  quotes  three  times  as 
many  decisions  from  perhaps  still  higher  courts  to  prove  the  opposite,  and  I 
am  convinced  that  if,  in  another  trial,  these  decisions  should  be  supported  by 
twenty-five  volumes,  they  will  adduce  one  hundred  in  support  of  the  con- 
trary, if  it  is  Anarchists  who  are  to  be  tried.  And  not  even  under  such  a 
law,  a  law  that  a  schoolboy  must  despise,  not  even  by  such  methods  have 
they  been  able  to  "legally"  convict  us.  They  have  suborned  perjury  to  boot. 

I  tell  you  frankly  and  openly,  I  am  for  force.  I  have  already  told  Cap- 
tain Schaack,  "If  they  use  cannons  against  us,  we  shall  use  dynamite  against 
them." 


36  ADDRESS  OF  LOUIS  LINGG 

I  repeat  that  I  am  the  enemy  of  the  "order"  of  today,  and  I  repeat  that, 
with  all  my  powers,  so  long  as  breath  remains  in  me,  I  shall  combat  it.  I 
declare  again,  frankly  and  openly,  that  I  am  in  favor  of  using  force.  I  have 
told  Captain  Schaack,  and  I  stand  by  it,  "If  you  cannonade  us,  we  shall 
dynamite  you."  You  laugh !  Perhaps  you  think,  "You'll  throw  no  more 
bombs" ;  but  let  me  assure  you  that  I  die  happy  on  the  gallows,  so  confident 
am  I  that  the  hundreds  and  thousands  to  whom  I  have  spoken  will  remember 
my  words;  and  when  you  shall  have  hanged  us,  then,  mark  my  words,  they 
will  do  the  bomb  throwing !  In  this  hope  I  say  to  you :  I  despise  you.  I 
despise  your  order,  your  laws,  your  force-propped  authority.  Hang  me  for  it ! 


ADDRESS  OF  ADOLPH  FISCHER 

YOUR  HONOR:  You  ask  me  why  sentence  of  death  should  not  be  passed 
upon  me.  I  will  not  talk  much.  I  will  only  say  that  I  protest  against  my 
being  sentenced  to  death,  because  I  have  committed  no  crime.  I  was  tried 
here  in  this  room  for  murder,  and  I  was  convicted  of  Anarchy.  I  protest 
against  being  sentenced  to  death,  because  I  have  not  been  found  guilty  of 
murder.  However,  if  I  am  to  die  on  account  of  being  an  Anarchist,  on  ac- 
count of  my  love  for  liberty,  fraternity  and  equality,  I  will  not  remonstrate. 
If  death  is  the  penalty  for  our  love  of  freedom  of  the  human  race,  then  I 
say  openly  I  have  forfeited  my  life;  but  a  murderer  I  am  not.  Although 
being  one  of  the  parties  who  arranged  the  Haymarket  meeting,  I  had  no 
more  to  do  with  the  throwing  of  that  bomb,  I  had  no  more  connection 
with  it  than  State's  Attorney  Grinnell  had.  I  do  not  deny  that  I  was  pres- 
ent at  the  Haymarket  meeting,  but  that  meeting — 

(At  this  point  Mr.  Salomon  stepped  up  and  spoke  to  Mr.  Fischer  in  a 
low  tone,  but  the  latter  waved  him  off  and  said:) 

Mr.  Salomon,  be  so  kind.  I  know  what  I  am  talking  about.  Now,  that 
Haymarket  meeting  was  not  called  for  the  purpose  of  committing  violence 
and  crime.  No;  but  the  meeting  was  called  for  the  purpose  of  protesting 
against  the  outrages  and  crimes  committed  by  the  police  on  the  previous 
day,  out  at  McCormick's.  The  State's  witness,  Waller,  and  others  have 
testified  here,  and  I  only  need  to  repeat  it,  that  we  had  a  meeting  on  Mon- 
day night,  and  at  this  meeting — the  affair  at  McCormick's  taking  place  just 
a  few  hours  previous — took  action  and  called  a  mass  meeting  for  the  pur- 
pose of  protesting  against  the  brutal  outrages  of  the  police.  Waller  was 
chairman  of  this  meeting,  and  he  himself  made  the  motion  to  hold  the  meet- 
ing at  the  Haymarket.  It  was  also  he  who  appointed  me  as  a  committee  to 
have  handbills  printed  and  to  provide  for  speakers ;  that  I  did,  and  noth- 
ing else.  The  next  day  I  went  to  Wehrer  &  Klein,  and  had  25,000  handbills 
printed,  and  I  invited  Spies  to  speak  at  the  Haymarket  meeting.  In  the 
original  of  the  "copy"  I  had  the  line  "Workingmen,  appear  armed !"  and 
my  reason  for  putting  those  words  in  was  because  I  didn't  want  the  work- 
ingmen  to  be  shot  down  in  that  meeting  as  on  other  occasions.  But  as 
those  circulars  were  printed,  or  as  a  few  of  them  were  printed  and  brought 
over  to  me  at  the  Arbeiter-Zeitung  office,  my  Comrade  Spies  saw  one  of 
them.  I  had  invited  him  to  speak  before  that.  He  showed  me  the  circular, 
and  said :  "Well,  Fischer,  if  those  circulars  are  distributed,  I  won't  speak." 
I  admitted  it  would  be  better  to  take  the  objectionable  words  out,  and  Mr. 
Spies  spoke.  And  that  is  all  I  had  to  do  with  that  meeting.  Well,  I  went 
to  the  Haymarket  about  8:15  o'clock,  and  stayed  there  until  Parsons  inter- 
rupted Fielden's  speech.  Parsons  stepped  up  to  the  stand,  and  said  that  it 
looked  like  it  was  going  to  rain,  and  that  the  assembly  had  better  adjourn 
to  Zepf's  Hall.  At  that  moment  a  friend  of  mine  who  testified  on  the  wit- 
ness stand,  went  with  me  to  Zepf's  Hall,  and  we  sat  down  at  a  table  and 
had  a  glass  of  beer.  At  the  moment  I  was  going  to  sit  down,  my  friend 
Parsons  came  in  with  some  other  persons,  and  after  I  was  sitting  there 
about  five  minutes  the  explosion  occurred.  I  had  no  idea  that  anything  of 
the  kind  would  happen,  because,  as  the  State's  witnesses  testified  themselves, 
there  was  no  agreement  to  defend  ourselves  that  night.  It  was  only  a  meet- 
ing called  to  protest. 

Now,  as  I  said  before,  this  verdict,  which  was  rendered  by  the  jury  in 
this  room,  is  not  directed  against  murder,  but  against  Anarchy.  I  feel  that 
I  am  sentenced,  or  that  I  will  be  sentenced,  to  death  because  of  being  an 


ADDRESS  OF  ADOLPH  FISCHER  33 

Anarchist,  and  not  because  I  am  a  murderer.  I  have  never  been  a  murderer. 
I  have  never  yet  committed  a  crime  in  my  life;  but  I  know  a  certain  man 
who  is  on  the  way  to  becoming  a  murderer,  an  assassin,  and  that  man  is 
Grinnell — the  State's  Attorney  Grinnell — because  he  brought  men  on  the 
witness  stand  who  he  knew  would  swear  falsely;  and  I  publicly  denounce 
Mr.  Grinnell  as  a  murderer  and  assassin  if  I  should  be  executed.  But  if 
the  ruling  class  thinks  that  by  executing  us,  hanging  a  few  Anarchists,  they 
can  crush  out  Anarchy,  they  will  be  badly  mistaken,  because  the  Anarchist 
loves  his  principles  better  than  his  life.  An  Anarchist  is  always  ready  to  die 
for  his  principles ;  but  in  this  case  I  have  been  charged  with  murder,  and  I 
am  not  a  murderer.  You  will  find  it  impossible  to  kill  a  principle,  although 
you  may  take  the  life  of  men  who  confess  these  principles.  The  more  the 
believers  in  just  causes  are  persecuted,  the  quicker  will  their  ideas  be  real- 
ized. For  instance,  in  rendering  such  an  unjust  and  barbarous  verdict,  the 
twelve  "honorable"  men  in  the  jury  box  have  done  more  for  the  furtherance 
of  Anarchism  than  the  convicted  could  have  accomplished  in  a  generation. 
This  verdict  is  a  death-blow  against  free  speech,  free  press,  and  free  thought 
in  this  country,  and  the  people  will  be  conscious  of  it,  too.  This  is  all  I 
care  to  say. 


cADDRESS  OF  GEORGE  ENGEL 

When,  in  the  year  1872,  I  left  Germany  because  it  had  become  impossible 
for  me  to  gain  there,  by  the  labor  of  my  hands,  a  livelihood  such  as  man  is 
worthy  to  enjoy — the  introduction  of  machinery  having  ruined  the  smaller 
craftsmen  and  made  the  outlook  for  the  future  appear  very  dark  to  them — I 
concluded  to  go  with  my  family  to  the  land  of  America,  the  land  that  had 
been  praised  to  me  by  so  many  as  the  land  of  liberty. 

On  the  occasion  of  my  arrival  at  Philadelphia,  on  the  8th  of  January, 
1873,  my  heart  swelled  with  joy  in  the  hope  and  in  the  belief  that  in  the 
future  I  would  live  among  free  men,  and  in  a  free  country.  I  made  up  my 
mind  to  become  a  good  citizen  of  this  country,  and  congratulated  myself  on 
having  left  Germany,  and  landed  in  this  glorious  republic.  And  I  believe  my 
past  history  will  bear  witness  that  I  have  ever  striven  to  be  a  good  citizen 
of  this  country.  This  is  the  first  occasion  of  my  standing  before  an  Amer- 
ican court,  and  on  this  occasion  it  is  murder  of  which  I  am  accused.  And 
for  what  reasons  do  I  stand  here?  For  what  reasons  am  I  accused  of  mur- 
der? The  same  that  caused  me  to  leave  Germany — the  poverty,  the  misery 
of  the  working  classes. 

And  here,  too,  in  this  "free  republic,"  in  the  richest  country  of  the 
world,  there  are  numerous  proletarians  for  whom  no  table  is  set ;  who,  as 
outcasts  of  society,  stray  joylessly  through  life.  I  have  seen  human  beings 
gather  their  daily  food  from  the  garbage  heaps  of  the  streets,  to  quiet  there- 
with their  gnawing  hunger. 

I  have  read  in  the  daily  papers  of  occurrences  which  prove  to  me  that 
here,  too,  in  this  great  "free  land,"  people  are  doomed  to  die  of  starvation. 
This  brought  me  to  reflection,  and  to  the  question :  What  are  the  peculiar 
causes  that  could  bring  about  such  a  condition  of  society?  I  then  began  to 
give  our  political  institutions  more  attention  than  formerly.  My  discoveries 
brought  to  me  the  knowledge  that  the  same  societary  evils  exist  here  that  exist 
in  Germany.  This  is  the  explanation  of  what  induced  me  to  study  the  social 
question,  to  become  a  Socialist.  And  I  proceeded  with  all  the  means  at 
my  command  to  make  myself  familiar  with  the  new  doctrine. 

When,  in  1878,  I  came  here  from  Philadelphia,  I  strove  to  better  my 
condition,  believing  it  would  be  less  difficult  to  establish  a  means  of  liveli- 
hood here  than  in  Philadelphia,  where  I  had  tried  in  vain  to  make  a  living. 
But  here,  too,  I  found  myself  disappointed.  I  began  to  understand  that  it 
made  no  difference  to  the  proletarian,  whether  he  lived  in  New  York,  Phila- 
delphia, or  Chicago.  In  the  factory  in  which  I  worked,  I  became  acquainted 
with  a  man  who  pointed  out  to  me  the  causes  that  brought  about  the  difficult 
and  fruitless  battles  of  the  workingmen  for  the  means  of  existence.  He 
explained  to  me,  by  the  logic  of  scientific  Socialism,  how  mistaken  I  was  in 
believing  that  I  could  make  an  independent  living  by  the  toil  of  my  hands,  so 
long  as  machinery,  raw  material,  etc.,  were  guaranteed  to  the  capitalists  as 
private  property  by  the  State.  That  I  might  further  enlighten  my  mind  in 
regard  to  these  facts,  I  purchased  with  money  earned  by  myself  and  family, 
sociological  works,  among  them  those  of  LaSalle,  Marx,  and  Henry  George. 
After  the  study  of  these  books,  it  became  clear  to  me  why  a  workingman 
could  not  decently  exist  in  this  rich  country.  I  now  began  to  think  of  ways 
and  means  to  remedy  this.  I  hit  upon  the  ballot  box;  for  it  had  been  told 
me  so  often  that  this  was  the  means  by  which  workingmen  could  better  their 
condition. 

I  took  part  in  politics  with  the  earnestness  of  a  good  citizen ;  but  I  was 
soon  to  find  that  the  teachings  of  a  "free  ballot  box"  are  a  myth,  and  that  I 


38  ADDRESS  OF  GEORGE  ENGEL. 

had  again  been  duped.  I  came  to  the  opinion  that  as  long  as  workingmen 
are  economically  enslaved  they  cannot  be  politically  free.  It  became  clear  to 
me  that  the  working  class  would  never  bring  about  a  form  of  society  guar- 
anteeing work,  bread,  and  a  happy  life  by  means  of  the  ballot. 

Before  I  had  lost  my  faith  in  the  ballot  box  the  following  occurrences 
transpired  which  proved  to  me  that  the  politicians  of  this  country  were  thor- 
oughly corrupt.  When,  in  the  fourteenth  ward,  in  which  I  lived  and  had  the 
right  to  vote,  the  Social  Democratic  party  had  grown  to  such  dimensions  as 
to  make  it  dangerous  for  the  Republican  and  Democratic  parties,  the  latter 
forthwith  united  and  took  stand  against  the  Social  Democrats.  This,  of 
course,  was  natural;  for  are  not  their  interests  indentical?  And  as  the  Social 
Democrats  nevertheless  elected  their  candidates,  they  were  beaten  out  of  the 
fruits  of  their  victory  by  the  corrupt  schemes  of  the  old  political  parties.  The 
ballot  box  was  stolen  and  the  votes  so  "corrected"  that  it  became  impossible 
for  the  opposition  to  proclaim  their  candidates  elected.  The  workingmen 
sought  to  obtain  justice  through  the  courts,  but  it  was  all  in  vain.  The  trial 
cost  them  fifteen  hundred  dollars,  but  their  rights  they  never  obtained. 

Soon  enough  I  iound  that  political  corruption  had  burrowed  through  the 
ranks  of  the  Social  Democrats.  I  left  this  party  and  joined  the  International 
Working  People's  Association  that  was  just  being  organized.  The  members 
of  that  body  have  the  firm  conviction  that  the  workingman  can  free  himself 
from  the  tyranny  of  capitalism  only  through  force,  just  as  all  advances  of 
which  history  speaks  have  been  brought  about  through  force  alone.  We  see 
from  the  history  of  this  country  that  the  first  colonists  won  their  liberty  only 
through  force;  that  through  force  slavery  was  abolished,  and  just  as  the  man 
who  agitated  against  slavery  in  this  country  had  to  ascend  the  gallows,  so 
also  must  we.  He  who  speaks  for  the  workingman  today  must  hang.  And 
why?  Because  this  republic  is  not  governed  by  people  who  have  obtained 
their  offices  honestly. 

Who  are  the  leaders  at  Washington  that  are  to  guard  the  interests  of 
this  nation?  Have  they  been  elected  by  the  people,  or  by  the  aid  of  money? 
They  have  no  right  to  make  laws  for  us,  because  they  were  not  elected  by 
the  people.  These  are  the  reasons  why  I  have  lost  all  respect  for  American 
laws. 

The  fact  that  through  the  improvement  of  machinery  so  many  men  are 
thrown  out  of  employment,  or  at  best,  working  but  half  the  time,  brings 
them  to  reflection.  They  have  leisure,  and  they  consider  how  their  condi- 
tions can  be  changed.  Reading  matter  that  has  been  written  in  their  in- 
terest gets  into  their  hands,  and,  faulty  though  their  education  may  be,  they 
can  nevertheless  cull  the  truths  contained  in  those  writings.  This,  of  course, 
is  not  pleasant  for  the  capitalistic  class,  but  they  cannot  prevent  it.  And  it 
is  my  firm  conviction  in  a  comparatively  short  time  the  great  mass  of 
proletarians  will  understand  that  they  can  be  freed  from  their  bonds  only 
through  Socialism.  One  must  consider  what  Carl  Schurz  said  scarcely  eight 
years  ago :  That,  "in  this  country  there  is  no  room  for  Socialism" ;  and  yet 
today  Socialism  stands  before  the  bar  of  the  court.  For  this  reason  it  is 
my  firm  conviction  that  if  these  few  years  sufficed  to  make  Socialism  one  of 
the  burning  questions  of  the  day,  it  will  require  but  a  short  time  more  to 
put  it  in  practical  operation. 

All  that  I  have  to  say  in  regard  to  my  conviction  is,  that  I  was  not  at 
all  surprised ;  for  it  has  ever  been  that  the  men  who  have  endeavored  to 
enlighten  their  fellow  men  have  been  thrown  into  prison  or  put  to  death, 
as  was  the  casfi  with  John  Brown.  I  found,  long  ago,  that  the  workingman 
has  no  more  rights  here  than  anywhere  else  in  the  world.  The  State's 
attoiney  has  stated  that  we  were  not  citizens.  I  have  been  a  citizen  this 
long  time :  but  it  does  not  occur  to  me  to  appeal  for  my  rights  as  a  citizen, 
knowing  as  well  as  I  do,  that  this  does  not  make  a  particle  of  difference. 
Citizen  or  not —  as  a  workingman  I  am  without  rights,  and  therefore  I  re- 


ADDRESS  OF  GEORGE  ENGEL.  39 

spect  neither  your  rights  nor  your  laws,  which  are  made  and  directed  by 
one  class  against  the  other — the  working  class. 

Of  what  does  my  crime  consist? 

That  I  have  labored  to  bring  about  a  system  of  society  by  which  it  is 
impossible  for  one  to  hoard  millions,  through  the  improvements  in  machin- 
ery, while  the  great  masses  sink  to  degradation  and  misery.  As  water  and 
air  are  free  to  all,  so  should  inventions  of  scientific  men  be  applied  for  the 
benefit  of  all.  The  statute  laws  we  have  are  in  opposition  to  the  laws  of 
nature,  in  that  they  rob  the  great  masses  of  their  rights  to  "life,  liberty,  and 
the  pursuit  of  happiness." 

I  am  too  much  a  man  of  feeling  not  to  battle  against  the  societary  con- 
ditions of  today.  Every  considerate  person  must  combat  a  system  which 
makes  it  possible  for  the  individual  to  rake  and  hoard  millions  in  a  few 
years,  while  on  the  other  side,  thousands  become  tramps  and  beggars. 

Is  it  to  be  wondered  at  that  under  such  circumstances  men  arise  who 
strive  and  struggle  to  create  other  conditions,  where  humanity  shall  take 
precedence  of  all  other  considerations?  This  is  the  aim  of  Socialism,  and 
to  this  I  joyfully  subscribe. 

The  State  s  attorney  said  here  that  Anarchy  was  on  trial. 

Anarchism  and  Socialism  are  as  much  alike,  in  my  opinion,  as  one  egg 
is  like  anothe:.  They  differ  only  in  their  tactics.  The  Anarchists  have 
abandoned  the  way  of  liberating  humanity  which  Socialists  would  take  to 
accomplish  thi-  I  say :  Believe  no  more  in  the  ballot,  and  use  all  other 
means  at  your  command.  Because  we  have  done  so  we  stand  arraigned  here 
today — because  we  have  pointed  out  to  the  people  the  proper  way.  The  An- 
archists are  being  hunted  and  persecuted  for  this  in  every  clime,  but  in 
the  face  of  it  all  Anarchism  is  gaining  more  and  more  adherents,  and  if  you 
cut  off  our  opportunities  of  open  agitation,  then  will  the  work  be  done 
secretly.  If  the  State's  attorney  thinks  he  can  root  out  Socialism  by  hang- 
ing seven  of  our  men  and  condemning  the  other  to  fifteen  years'  servitude, 
he  is  laboring  under  a  very  wrong  impression.  The  tactics  simply  will  be 
changed — that  is  all.  No  power  on  earth  can  rob  the  workingman  of  his 
knowledge  of  how  to  make  bombs — and  that  knowledge  he  possesses.  I  do 
not  wish  for  State's  Attorney  Grinnell  and  his  assistant,  Furthman,  the  fate 
of  the  chief  of  police  Rumpff. 

If  Anarchism  could  be  rooted  out,  it  would  have  been  accomplished 
long  ago  in  other  countries.  On  the  night  on  which  the  first  bomb  in  this 
country  was  thrown,  I  was  in  my  apartments  at  home.  I  knew  nothing  of 
the  conspiracy  which  the  State's  attorney  pretends  to  have  discovered. 

It  is  true  i  am  acquainted  with  several  of  my  fellow-defendants;  with 
most  of  them  however,  but  slightly,  through  seeing  them  at  meetings,  and 
hearing  them  speak.  Nor  do  I  deny,  that  I,  too,  have  spoken  at  meetings, 
saying  that,  if  every  workingman  had  a  bomb  in  his  pocket,  capitalistic  rule 
would  soon  come  to  an  end. 

That  is  my  opinion,  and  my  wish ;  it  became  my  conviction,  when  I  dis- 
covered the  wickedness  of  the  capitalistic  conditions  of  the  day. 

When  hundreds  of  workingmen  have  been  destroyed  in  mines  in  conse- 
quence of  faulty  preparations,  for  the  repairing  of  which  the  owners  were 
too  stingy,  the  capitalistic  papers  have  scarcely  noticed  it.  See  with  what 
satisfaction  and  cruelty  they  make  their  report,  when  here  and  there  work- 
ingmen have  been  fired  upon,  while  striking  for  a  few  cents'  increase  in 
their  wages,  that  they  might  earn  only  a  scanty  subsistence. 

Can  anyone  feel  respect  for  a  government  that  accords  rights  only  to 
the  privileged  classes  and  none  to  the  workers  ?  We  have  seen  but  recently 
how  the  coal  barons  combined  to  form  a  conspiracy  to  raise  the  price  of 
coal,  while  at  the  same  time  reducing  the  already  low  wages  of  their  men. 
Are  they  accused  of  conspiracy  on  that  account?  But  when  workingmen 


40  ADDRESS  OF  GEORGE  ENGEL 

dare  ask  an  increase  in  their  wages,  the  militia  and  the  police  are  sent  out 
to  shoot  them  down. 

For  such  a  government  as  this  I  can  feel  no  respect,  and  will  combat  it, 
despite  its  power,  despite  its  police,  despite  its  spies. 

I  hate  and  combat,  not  the  individual  capitalist,  but  the  system  that 
gives  him  those  privileges.  My  greatest  wish  is  that  workingmen  may  rec- 
ognize who  are  their  friends  and  who  are  their  enemies. 

As  to  my  conviction,  brought  about  as  it  was,  through  capitalistic  in- 
fluence, I  have  not  one  word  to  say. 


tt 

P30. 


•'• 


Presented  by  the  Pioneer  Relief,  Aid 
and  Support  Association,  organ- 
ized January,  1888,  to  keep  alive 
the  memory  of  our  Martyred  Dead. 


